I never saw the point of prison for white collar crimes. All it does these days is give them “cred” and make them more popular. These people have brains and need to be working off their “debt to society” by going into poor areas and teaching disadvantaged people how to get ahead.
Look at Martha Stewart, she could’ve done a lot of good helping others, but no, she spent time in jail, got it over with, became a “Hero” to most and no one learned anything. I’m sure she still thinks she was wronged (though her background showed she knew better).
If she spend a few good years, NOT earning money and having to do some actual work helping others improve their lot, as punishment, she would’ve at least started to see the other side of the coin.
So you think that Elizabeth Holmes, who didn’t even finish an undergraduate degree, should “teach disadvantaged people how to get ahead.” Exactly what lessons do you think she could offer people? How to lie and cheat your way to fame and wealth?
Just finished listening to Drop Out. She 100% should go to prison for a significant time period. Flat out fraud along with the potential to harm actual people. People were given medical diagnosis’s based on flawed blood tests.
Our Constitution has been construed to allow the government to remove your right to life, your right to liberty. It also seems that cruel is only forbidden when the specific cruelty is also unusual.
It seems to me I don’t need Bernie Madoff, or any other fraud perpetrator in jail. They offer no physical threat. Money is their weapon, and other forms of wealth. So, for either a term of years, or in extreme cases, let us remove their right to own wealth of any sort. Allow them two changes of clothing, and the addresses of the nearest soup kitchen and homeless shelter. All the money or property they have, and any that they obtain by any means during their sentences is forfeited immediately, and applied to repayment, or restitution of the harm done.
The spouses of convicted con artists have a difficult choice. Community property allows far too easy a route to conceal funds. Conviction should be grounds for divorce under highly favorable property division, but, if you meant it when you said “for richer, or poorer” you have the later, perhaps permanently.
I also believe that if the Board of Directors can even claim not to be responsible for the actions of the company, they need a different title, and their absence of influence and responsibility needs to be stated as a matter of public record in the charter of the corporation. Chorus Line or Glamour Squad, or Public Cheerleaders perhaps.
Tris
Despite the high pay levels, being famous seems to me to be a troublesome profession. The fact that you cannot resign is the worst feature.
Starting a company, having a dream and taking millions in investment isn’t a crime. Even if the idea is dumb or impractical.
However, as soon as you start faking results and showing those to people you’ve crossed the line over to fraud.
Mostly in an investment scam it’s only the people who invest that get hurt. In this case however a fraudulent product was also brought into the market and there is real harm to customers here from the fraud.
Do I think she should serve a lot of jail time? Not really, but definitely a few years wouldn’t hurt.
I just finished the book. That was the thing that stuck out to me - a whole bunch of people should be getting disbarred. (There’s zealous representation of your client and then there’s what they did.)
Almost two years since the last post, Elizabeth Holmes was finally in court this week for hearings on her upcoming trial (scheduled for August 31 but if history is any guide, sure to be delayed again). People are making guesses on her possible defense based on the pre-trial proceedings.
"Testing involves many different variables. What the government offers is without scientific basis, they have to establish Theranos technology was responsible for erroneous results. Just because it happened doesn’t mean it was because of Theranos technology.”
There’s also the problem of the missing database of lab results, so the government must rely on witness testimony that the results were inaccurate. The defense calls that a “gaping hole in the government’s case” while also complaining that its absence makes it harder for the defense to make its case. Evidently unmentioned is that the database is missing because Theranos destroyed it as investigators were closing in. It will be interesting to see how that defense plays out for a jury. Pregnant Theranos founder Holmes’ defense takes shape as she appears in courtroom for first time since COVID pandemic – East Bay Times
And finally, speculation on a possible Svengali defense that lays the blame on her former boyfriend. This prediction is based on the defense intention to call a psychologist who specializes in relationship trauma as a witness. Is Theranos founder Holmes’ planning a trauma defense? (mercurynews.com)
The scientists that the company did employ still exist and can testify as to their opinions on the viability of the tech and the product that they produced. This shouldn’t be a very long trial.
There is reportedly a criminal investigation into the destruction of the database. I think the defense could argue that while it might be evidence of guilt of someone, it isn’t necessarily evidence that Holmes is guilty. This trial is for her, not Theranos.