> It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Not excusing it, but ma

> It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Not excusing it, but maybe it was a company vs personal thing (eg. consumer harm perhaps didn't pierce the corporate veil[1]). Whereas Fraud against investors is much more of a personal/individual thing. [1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/piercing_the_corporate_veil https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/piercing_the_corporate_veil