6 ms·

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478172078092128256 https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478172078092128256 "They run concurrently except to the extent neces

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478172078092128256 https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478172078092128256 "They run concurrently except to the extent necessary to serve the full sentence the judge selects." When he said it's not clear she'll do less than 20, I don't think he meant she might get more than 20, just that she might get 20.

tptacek 5y ago
The thing here is, you get up to around 20 years just with a single wire fraud count, because the amounts involved here are so high. We're at $143MM in losses on the three wire fraud charges together (2B1.1 states they're to be summed up), which gets you a 26(!)-level enhancement from the base level of 7. That's 12 years (at the bottom of the range), and every other enhancement you take after level 33 is another ~4 years; there are 3-4 enhancements (like "sophisticated means") that seem likely to apply. On the flip side, given the huge sums involved, it's not easy to make the numbers make sense served consecutively. Here's an article about grouping: https://www.josephabramslaw.com/understanding-grouping-rules-under-the-federal-sentencing-guidelines/ https://www.josephabramslaw.com/understanding-grouping-rules...
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  Yes there's lots of very high and very low guesses as to what she might get going around. I'm just commenting here specifically on this twitter guy's opinion.
  - tptacek 5y ago
    I missed some guidelines stuff; there's a separate section for role in the offense, and another for obstruction. The tally I get: 7 (Base offense) +24 ($140MM in damages) +2 (10+ victims) +2 (Sophisticated means) +4 (Leading role) +2 (Abuse of public trust) +2 (Obstructed investigations) That gets us level... 43. Yikes. Consecutive vs. concurrent isn't the issue here; doing a $140MM wire fraud puts you on the hook for an insane sentence. So this is a case where the whale sushi sentence is... theoretically possible?! Wow.
    - roywiggins 5y ago
      Mitchell Eppner agrees with you: https://mitchellepner.substack.com/p/elizabeth-holmes-found-guilty-on https://mitchellepner.substack.com/p/elizabeth-holmes-found-...
      - tptacek 5y ago
        There is no f'ing way she's getting 65 years though.
        checkyoursudo 5y ago
        My gut says that she'll get about 20 (or 20 years worth of concurrent), and get out in about 8 to 10.
        roywiggins 5y ago
        My understanding is that on federal charges you have to serve at least 85% or so of the sentence, even with good behavior.
        checkyoursudo 5y ago
        Ah, in that case, I'll place my marker on 11 years with 9.35 served.
        karlzt 5y ago
        Others are guilty too, that number could go down to 20 months served.
    - tiahura 5y ago
      Yikes. Plus, my understanding is that > 10 means no minimum security camp and > 20 means no low security, so she would start off in medium security. - assuming it works the same way with woman as with men)
  - _moof 5y ago
    "This Twitter guy" has probably forgotten more about federal criminal law than anyone on this site will ever learn. https://brownwhitelaw.com/kenneth-p-white/ https://brownwhitelaw.com/kenneth-p-white/
dragonwriter 5y ago
> "They run concurrently except to the extent necessary to serve the full sentence the judge selects." Note that that is a big except, when you have lots of points, which big $ frauds get you quickly.

tptacek 5y ago

The thing here is, you get up to around 20 years just with a single wire fraud count, because the amounts involved here are so high. We're at $143MM in losses on the three wire fraud charges together (2B1.1 states they're to be summed up), which gets you a 26(!)-level enhancement from the base level of 7. That's 12 years (at the bottom of the range), and every other enhancement you take after level 33 is another ~4 years; there are 3-4 enhancements (like "sophisticated means") that seem likely to apply. On the flip side, given the huge sums involved, it's not easy to make the numbers make sense served consecutively. Here's an article about grouping: https://www.josephabramslaw.com/understanding-grouping-rules-under-the-federal-sentencing-guidelines/ https://www.josephabramslaw.com/understanding-grouping-rules...

throwawaylinux 5y ago
Yes there's lots of very high and very low guesses as to what she might get going around. I'm just commenting here specifically on this twitter guy's opinion.
- tptacek 5y ago
  I missed some guidelines stuff; there's a separate section for role in the offense, and another for obstruction. The tally I get: 7 (Base offense) +24 ($140MM in damages) +2 (10+ victims) +2 (Sophisticated means) +4 (Leading role) +2 (Abuse of public trust) +2 (Obstructed investigations) That gets us level... 43. Yikes. Consecutive vs. concurrent isn't the issue here; doing a $140MM wire fraud puts you on the hook for an insane sentence. So this is a case where the whale sushi sentence is... theoretically possible?! Wow.
  - roywiggins 5y ago
    Mitchell Eppner agrees with you: https://mitchellepner.substack.com/p/elizabeth-holmes-found-guilty-on https://mitchellepner.substack.com/p/elizabeth-holmes-found-...
    - tptacek 5y ago
      There is no f'ing way she's getting 65 years though.
      - checkyoursudo 5y ago
        My gut says that she'll get about 20 (or 20 years worth of concurrent), and get out in about 8 to 10.
        roywiggins 5y ago
        My understanding is that on federal charges you have to serve at least 85% or so of the sentence, even with good behavior.
        checkyoursudo 5y ago
        Ah, in that case, I'll place my marker on 11 years with 9.35 served.
        karlzt 5y ago
        Others are guilty too, that number could go down to 20 months served.
  - tiahura 5y ago
    Yikes. Plus, my understanding is that > 10 means no minimum security camp and > 20 means no low security, so she would start off in medium security. - assuming it works the same way with woman as with men)
- _moof 5y ago
  "This Twitter guy" has probably forgotten more about federal criminal law than anyone on this site will ever learn. https://brownwhitelaw.com/kenneth-p-white/ https://brownwhitelaw.com/kenneth-p-white/

dragonwriter 5y ago

> "They run concurrently except to the extent necessary to serve the full sentence the judge selects." Note that that is a big except, when you have lots of points, which big $ frauds get you quickly.