7 ms·

I'm not sure if there is much of a point to this story. A guy shows up at the trial and tells all kinds of lies to reporters about who he is and why he's there.

I'm not sure if there is much of a point to this story. A guy shows up at the trial and tells all kinds of lies to reporters about who he is and why he's there. That doesn't seem to have much relevance to or impact on the trial itself. On the other hand, it's mildly amusing that there's more lying being added to the Theranos story.

filoleg 5y ago
>and tells all kinds of lies to reporters about who he is and why he's there And also asking reporters' takes on Elizabeth Holmes, and then trying to "correct" them by saying that everyone just copypastes the initial story, and no one has told the real truth behind Theranos (implying that Elizabeth is innocent and gets blamed unfairly). Keep in mind, those weren't random reporters, those were reporters who were lining up to be juries on the trial. I think it is pretty newsworthy that one of the accused parties' family members decided to mislead potential juries under a fake identity outside of the courthouse.
- cma 5y ago
  Are you sure they weren't there reporting on the jury selection? A bunch of reporters lining up to be juries on the trial while writing articles on it? That doesn't make any sense.
- chihuahua 5y ago
  I don't think the reporters were going to be jurors. I read the article again and it doesn't say that, as far as I can tell.
  - filoleg 5y ago
    Apologies, I've re-read it again, and it seems like I completely misinterpreted the line where it said "Over the course of two days of jury selection, he gabbed with reporters standing in line to get in the courthouse". Now that I am re-reading it, it definitely seems like I've made a bad assumption there.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
alphabetting 5y ago
A defendant's father in law who happens to be a hotel magnate lying to a bunch of reporters at her trial trying to sway coverage is most definitely newsworthy. It doesn't need to have an impact on the trial to be newsworthy.
- filoleg 5y ago
  not just lying to reporters, but lying under a fake identity and then trying to deny it halfway through. Why would he use a fake identity and then try to cover it up, if he was doing nothing wrong and just going about his business as usual?
  - randycupertino 5y ago
    > lying under a fake identity and then trying to deny it halfway through. Why would he use a fake identity and then try to cover it up, The whole debacle is just bonkers. I agree the story might be mere "human interest" but imo it certainly is interesting! His behavior fits with the whole gestalt of fraud, entitlement and deception.
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    Journalists mislead and lie as a matter of course during investigations and in their stories. This guy needn't have been doing anything "wrong" to want to mislead them or lie to them. It might have been hamfisted, but I admire the chutzpah. Definitely an amusing news story, it's like something out of a Seinfeld episode.
  - tpoacher 5y ago
    He was lying to reporters. Not to police or a judge. You are under no obligation to not lie to a reporter. In fact, it used to be, that a reporter's job was to get to the truth, and that skill used to be admired and celebrated. Now it seems they're so flabbergasted when someone lies to one they decide to publish a story about it.
riazrizvi 5y ago
It’s news when we onlookers are weighing up the defendant’s argument that they weren’t trying to do fraud but were instead caught up in an abusive relationship by her boyfriend at the time who was the real fraudster. Having the father of your current boyfriend do more fraud schenanigans on your behalf undermines that defense for me.
- gfodor 5y ago
  If my daughter in law and mother of my grandchild was on trial that could lead to prison I wouldn’t be above doing things that were legal but unethical to try to tilt the scales to prevent my grandchild from losing their mother.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - Barrin92 5y ago
    I wouldn't even defend my own daughter, let alone my daughter in law if it turned out she sold fraudulent tests to cancer patients.[1]. I would never defend anyone, family or otherwise if they threaten the health of seriously ill patients. Do you see how morally deprived that is? Mate I'm not even sure she had that kid for any other reason than to tilt the trial in her favor, and elicit exactly this response [1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1476973026 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1...
    - BearOso 5y ago
      I agree. There was speculation a long time ago that she would use a pregnancy for sympathy. The woman is a sociopath. I doubt she cares about the child as anything other than a tool to get out of trouble.
    - gfodor 5y ago
      The point isn't that he's defending her, he's defending his grandkid. Morality is tricky when it comes to your obligation towards protecting innocent family members. Specifically if there are legal actions you can take to potentially influence the trial, which is the authority, towards more lenient sentencing to protect your grandchildren.
joe_the_user 5y ago
The story of Elizabeth Holmes is obviously more than just whether she will be found guilty or innocent. The story involves the web of connections that allowed her to achieve the dubious things she achieved and wealthy supporters are clearly relevant to that. Of course, the existence of some powerful supporters conceivably could have an impact on her trial too, even if the simple that his guy showing up by itself probably won't.
perl4ever 5y ago
I was struck by something else. Who describes someone's family as their "entourage"?
- gowld 5y ago
  Someone who doesn't know the precise identities of everyone in the group following her around, or someone describing a diverse group of associates. This is completely normal langauge.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  There may have been non-family members also in that group but not in the photo.
  - perl4ever 5y ago
    Sure. Lots of things are possible. But what was written was that the group was her family members and then it was called an "entourage". Which is odd as it stands. It could well be sloppy writing or an editing mishap. However, it felt to me like it might signify an awkward attempt to dehumanize her and her family, since that was the overall theme of the article.
- dylan604 5y ago
  Does your family travel with you everywhere you go for work, play, any appearance? Was Johnny Drama part of Vince's entourage? It would be easy to consider someone's relative as part of the entourage while other relatives just a relative.
  - perl4ever 5y ago
    Sorry, my point was apparently unclear. I don't know who was in the group. Maybe the writer does, or maybe they don't. Maybe it was just her family, maybe it wasn't. However, the entourage is described as being her family members immediately prior. Speculating about the facts doesn't improve the writing (or the editing if that's at fault). It is what it is presented as, unless you were there or something.
ryanisnan 5y ago
She seems like enough of a fraud to have concocted this strange angle. In any old case, I would probably attribute this to an insignificant occurrence. In a case involving deception, I am highly suspicious.
015a 5y ago
Despite Bobby Allyn's insistence on saying he lied; he isn't reporting any evidence of it. Misleading, maybe, though one has to follow to be led. Evasive, absolutely. That's not lying. Alright, maybe his statement that he fixed old cars "for a living" could fade into being called a lie, or at least stated with intent to mislead. It really feels like, some third-rate reporter got angry about being hoodwinked, and decided to get back at him by writing a puffy hit-piece. Really ugly look for NPR; this isn't news or even noteworthy.
- joe_the_user 5y ago
  So you're saying this guy "hoodwinked" the reporter but didn't lie? Maybe this guy only misdirected. What going on is significant. In fact, that changes nothing. The story is that wealthy and powerful person showed up at the Holmes trial and made an effort to misdirect reporters. Whether he made overt factual untruths is irrelevant unless you the logic of a third grader.
- quantified 5y ago
  Isn’t telling someone your name is Hanson when it’s not lying?
- csilverman 5y ago
  It’s noteworthy because it’s bizarre behavior and he’s related to her. The question is how noteworthy. I tend to doubt there’s any sinister plot afoot here, or that it’ll have any impact on the trial. He probably wanted to attend the trial, knows she’s toxic, and was worried that any association with her might affect his businesses. But yeah, I think her father-in-law appearing at the trial in a flimsy disguise and giving ham-fistedly evasive responses is definitely worth a mention, even if it’s not legally actionable or related to the trial itself.
  - Brian_K_White 5y ago
    "It’s noteworthy because it’s bizarre behavior and he’s related to her." It's not noteworthy because it's bizarre behavior. It is specifically relevant behavior. This entire case is only about determining if she is guilty of engaging in exactly this behavior. We should all thank the guy for providing such a great example of why not to believe any story her and her lawyers cook up.
quantified 5y ago
"It's too ironic," said Griffith of the Times. "That Elizabeth Holmes is on trial for fraud and the media has this whole two days of interaction with someone who was misrepresenting themselves from her extended family." Just a shady group.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
RickJWagner 5y ago
NPR has made a niche for itself using 'human angles' to the story. They're not hard-hitting, they're not politically unbiased, they just make the soft sell for the Reader's Digest crowd. It's good business. They've found an audience, they intend to keep it.

filoleg 5y ago

>and tells all kinds of lies to reporters about who he is and why he's there And also asking reporters' takes on Elizabeth Holmes, and then trying to "correct" them by saying that everyone just copypastes the initial story, and no one has told the real truth behind Theranos (implying that Elizabeth is innocent and gets blamed unfairly). Keep in mind, those weren't random reporters, those were reporters who were lining up to be juries on the trial. I think it is pretty newsworthy that one of the accused parties' family members decided to mislead potential juries under a fake identity outside of the courthouse.

cma 5y ago
Are you sure they weren't there reporting on the jury selection? A bunch of reporters lining up to be juries on the trial while writing articles on it? That doesn't make any sense.
chihuahua 5y ago
I don't think the reporters were going to be jurors. I read the article again and it doesn't say that, as far as I can tell.
- filoleg 5y ago
  Apologies, I've re-read it again, and it seems like I completely misinterpreted the line where it said "Over the course of two days of jury selection, he gabbed with reporters standing in line to get in the courthouse". Now that I am re-reading it, it definitely seems like I've made a bad assumption there.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

alphabetting 5y ago

A defendant's father in law who happens to be a hotel magnate lying to a bunch of reporters at her trial trying to sway coverage is most definitely newsworthy. It doesn't need to have an impact on the trial to be newsworthy.

filoleg 5y ago
not just lying to reporters, but lying under a fake identity and then trying to deny it halfway through. Why would he use a fake identity and then try to cover it up, if he was doing nothing wrong and just going about his business as usual?
- randycupertino 5y ago
  > lying under a fake identity and then trying to deny it halfway through. Why would he use a fake identity and then try to cover it up, The whole debacle is just bonkers. I agree the story might be mere "human interest" but imo it certainly is interesting! His behavior fits with the whole gestalt of fraud, entitlement and deception.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  Journalists mislead and lie as a matter of course during investigations and in their stories. This guy needn't have been doing anything "wrong" to want to mislead them or lie to them. It might have been hamfisted, but I admire the chutzpah. Definitely an amusing news story, it's like something out of a Seinfeld episode.
- tpoacher 5y ago
  He was lying to reporters. Not to police or a judge. You are under no obligation to not lie to a reporter. In fact, it used to be, that a reporter's job was to get to the truth, and that skill used to be admired and celebrated. Now it seems they're so flabbergasted when someone lies to one they decide to publish a story about it.

riazrizvi 5y ago

It’s news when we onlookers are weighing up the defendant’s argument that they weren’t trying to do fraud but were instead caught up in an abusive relationship by her boyfriend at the time who was the real fraudster. Having the father of your current boyfriend do more fraud schenanigans on your behalf undermines that defense for me.

gfodor 5y ago
If my daughter in law and mother of my grandchild was on trial that could lead to prison I wouldn’t be above doing things that were legal but unethical to try to tilt the scales to prevent my grandchild from losing their mother.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Barrin92 5y ago
  I wouldn't even defend my own daughter, let alone my daughter in law if it turned out she sold fraudulent tests to cancer patients.[1]. I would never defend anyone, family or otherwise if they threaten the health of seriously ill patients. Do you see how morally deprived that is? Mate I'm not even sure she had that kid for any other reason than to tilt the trial in her favor, and elicit exactly this response [1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1476973026 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1...
  - BearOso 5y ago
    I agree. There was speculation a long time ago that she would use a pregnancy for sympathy. The woman is a sociopath. I doubt she cares about the child as anything other than a tool to get out of trouble.
  - gfodor 5y ago
    The point isn't that he's defending her, he's defending his grandkid. Morality is tricky when it comes to your obligation towards protecting innocent family members. Specifically if there are legal actions you can take to potentially influence the trial, which is the authority, towards more lenient sentencing to protect your grandchildren.

joe_the_user 5y ago

The story of Elizabeth Holmes is obviously more than just whether she will be found guilty or innocent. The story involves the web of connections that allowed her to achieve the dubious things she achieved and wealthy supporters are clearly relevant to that. Of course, the existence of some powerful supporters conceivably could have an impact on her trial too, even if the simple that his guy showing up by itself probably won't.

perl4ever 5y ago

I was struck by something else. Who describes someone's family as their "entourage"?

gowld 5y ago
Someone who doesn't know the precise identities of everyone in the group following her around, or someone describing a diverse group of associates. This is completely normal langauge.
boomboomsubban 5y ago
There may have been non-family members also in that group but not in the photo.
- perl4ever 5y ago
  Sure. Lots of things are possible. But what was written was that the group was her family members and then it was called an "entourage". Which is odd as it stands. It could well be sloppy writing or an editing mishap. However, it felt to me like it might signify an awkward attempt to dehumanize her and her family, since that was the overall theme of the article.
dylan604 5y ago
Does your family travel with you everywhere you go for work, play, any appearance? Was Johnny Drama part of Vince's entourage? It would be easy to consider someone's relative as part of the entourage while other relatives just a relative.
- perl4ever 5y ago
  Sorry, my point was apparently unclear. I don't know who was in the group. Maybe the writer does, or maybe they don't. Maybe it was just her family, maybe it wasn't. However, the entourage is described as being her family members immediately prior. Speculating about the facts doesn't improve the writing (or the editing if that's at fault). It is what it is presented as, unless you were there or something.

ryanisnan 5y ago

She seems like enough of a fraud to have concocted this strange angle. In any old case, I would probably attribute this to an insignificant occurrence. In a case involving deception, I am highly suspicious.

015a 5y ago

Despite Bobby Allyn's insistence on saying he lied; he isn't reporting any evidence of it. Misleading, maybe, though one has to follow to be led. Evasive, absolutely. That's not lying. Alright, maybe his statement that he fixed old cars "for a living" could fade into being called a lie, or at least stated with intent to mislead. It really feels like, some third-rate reporter got angry about being hoodwinked, and decided to get back at him by writing a puffy hit-piece. Really ugly look for NPR; this isn't news or even noteworthy.

joe_the_user 5y ago
So you're saying this guy "hoodwinked" the reporter but didn't lie? Maybe this guy only misdirected. What going on is significant. In fact, that changes nothing. The story is that wealthy and powerful person showed up at the Holmes trial and made an effort to misdirect reporters. Whether he made overt factual untruths is irrelevant unless you the logic of a third grader.
quantified 5y ago
Isn’t telling someone your name is Hanson when it’s not lying?
csilverman 5y ago
It’s noteworthy because it’s bizarre behavior and he’s related to her. The question is how noteworthy. I tend to doubt there’s any sinister plot afoot here, or that it’ll have any impact on the trial. He probably wanted to attend the trial, knows she’s toxic, and was worried that any association with her might affect his businesses. But yeah, I think her father-in-law appearing at the trial in a flimsy disguise and giving ham-fistedly evasive responses is definitely worth a mention, even if it’s not legally actionable or related to the trial itself.
- Brian_K_White 5y ago
  "It’s noteworthy because it’s bizarre behavior and he’s related to her." It's not noteworthy because it's bizarre behavior. It is specifically relevant behavior. This entire case is only about determining if she is guilty of engaging in exactly this behavior. We should all thank the guy for providing such a great example of why not to believe any story her and her lawyers cook up.

quantified 5y ago

"It's too ironic," said Griffith of the Times. "That Elizabeth Holmes is on trial for fraud and the media has this whole two days of interaction with someone who was misrepresenting themselves from her extended family." Just a shady group.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

RickJWagner 5y ago

NPR has made a niche for itself using 'human angles' to the story. They're not hard-hitting, they're not politically unbiased, they just make the soft sell for the Reader's Digest crowd. It's good business. They've found an audience, they intend to keep it.