5 ms·

She is doing such a disservice to other women that actually go through abuse. She is pulling all the stops now with the baby and abuse. Is she going to argue

She is doing such a disservice to other women that actually go through abuse. She is pulling all the stops now with the baby and abuse. Is she going to argue she is insane next?

lupire 5y ago
It's quite possible she actually went through abuse. That doesn't excuse her stealing a $billion with fake medical devices.
jollybean 5y ago
She started dating an odd guy who was wealthy and way older at the age of 20, which is really young. While I have no doubt of her culpability in some matters, I also have no doubt that this guy was a major manipulator behind the scenes, it looked like a cultish situation from the start. I think most everything came from him, she was a partial puppet - the fake voice, the clothing, the presentation - no 20 year old is able to figure all of that out. When the story started to come out, I found her relationship with that much older creepy guy to be the most interesting part by far. Legally, it's hard to say, but from a practical perspective, he's a very material part of the situation. Also I don't doubt the things she's claiming, but again I'm not sure what it really means or implies.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ctvo 5y ago
  I almost want to inform you this is Wendy’s drive thru. The patronizing tone here doesn’t help. Mark Zuckerberg was 20 when he started Facebook. Who do you think the puppeteer was in that situation or did Mark manage there, but Elizabeth couldn’t figure it all out?
  - aahortwwy 5y ago
    Sean Parker?
  - jollybean 5y ago
    Mark made a simple app when he was 20 that was popular and grew from there. Holmes was dating a very wealthy man who invested and co-managed the company, while sleeping with her, into a giant fraud. He was also a super creepy, controlling figure, all the signs of toxicity were there. It's not patronizing to suggest that 'the adult, experienced businessperson millionaire' in the partnership is the one figuring out how to best bilk investors of their money.
  - jollybean 5y ago
    Also FYI the OP's comment: "She is pulling all the stops now with the baby " Literally insinuating that 'the baby' is a part of a big ploy - that has to be the most patronizing and condescending possible remark of the situation.
- FooBarBizBazz 5y ago
  Now flip the script and consider Emmanuel Macron.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Is she going to argue she is insane next? The whole point of the abuse being raised in the context of the criminal case is to support a “mental disease or defect” defense, the closest available federal analog to the classic insanity defense so, yes, that's essentially the whole point.
arglebarglegar 5y ago
it’s very possible that she was abused and is also a bad person, that’s often how abuse perpetuates

She is doing such a disservice to other women that actually go through abuse. She is pulling all the stops now with the baby and abuse. Is she going to argue she is insane next?

lupire 5y ago

It's quite possible she actually went through abuse. That doesn't excuse her stealing a $billion with fake medical devices.

jollybean 5y ago

She started dating an odd guy who was wealthy and way older at the age of 20, which is really young. While I have no doubt of her culpability in some matters, I also have no doubt that this guy was a major manipulator behind the scenes, it looked like a cultish situation from the start. I think most everything came from him, she was a partial puppet - the fake voice, the clothing, the presentation - no 20 year old is able to figure all of that out. When the story started to come out, I found her relationship with that much older creepy guy to be the most interesting part by far. Legally, it's hard to say, but from a practical perspective, he's a very material part of the situation. Also I don't doubt the things she's claiming, but again I'm not sure what it really means or implies.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ctvo 5y ago
I almost want to inform you this is Wendy’s drive thru. The patronizing tone here doesn’t help. Mark Zuckerberg was 20 when he started Facebook. Who do you think the puppeteer was in that situation or did Mark manage there, but Elizabeth couldn’t figure it all out?
- aahortwwy 5y ago
  Sean Parker?
- jollybean 5y ago
  Mark made a simple app when he was 20 that was popular and grew from there. Holmes was dating a very wealthy man who invested and co-managed the company, while sleeping with her, into a giant fraud. He was also a super creepy, controlling figure, all the signs of toxicity were there. It's not patronizing to suggest that 'the adult, experienced businessperson millionaire' in the partnership is the one figuring out how to best bilk investors of their money.
- jollybean 5y ago
  Also FYI the OP's comment: "She is pulling all the stops now with the baby " Literally insinuating that 'the baby' is a part of a big ploy - that has to be the most patronizing and condescending possible remark of the situation.
FooBarBizBazz 5y ago
Now flip the script and consider Emmanuel Macron.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> Is she going to argue she is insane next? The whole point of the abuse being raised in the context of the criminal case is to support a “mental disease or defect” defense, the closest available federal analog to the classic insanity defense so, yes, that's essentially the whole point.

arglebarglegar 5y ago

it’s very possible that she was abused and is also a bad person, that’s often how abuse perpetuates