4 ms·
Judge declines to overturn Elizabeth Holmes guilty verdict
- metadat 4y agoIt sounds like Lizzie Evans still isn't feeling remorseful in any way, and remains intent on trying to slip out of the choke hold rather than accept reality and take responsibility for her actions. Signs of a true sociopath.
- blinding-streak 4y agoWell said. Hopefully in jail she has time for self reflection. Lots of time.
- andrei_says_ 4y agoZero chance. She will be reflecting on the injustices done to her.
- FunnyBadger 4y agoShe's a narcissist so that will never happen.
- jdlshore 4y agoI read the article and it says nothing about Holmes’ remorse or lack thereof. It’s normal to exhaust your legal options, and there’s nothing wrong with it. Do you have any stronger evidence for your claims?
- metadat 4y ago100% agree, it is normal to exhaust all legal avenues, especially if you have no conscience or soul after you ripped off, lied to, and scammed a bunch of people. No new evidence to report (or needed, imo).
- the-anarchist 4y agoYeah, think about the poor investors and VCs. Burn the witch!
- FunnyBadger 4y agoThe investors should have known better. They (e.g. George Shlutz, Henry Kissinger, etc.) primarily invested because they knew her father and it was a done deal due to their old-boy network. They got what they deserved when they failed to perform even minimal due diligence. She absolutely took advantage of their blind faith in their social network and was pushing obviously fraudulent technology. But the investors were all idiots also. Both should be jailed! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10366623/Meet-Theranos-investors-defrauded-millions.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10366623/Meet-Thera...
- mojomark 4y ago> Yeah, think about the poor investors and VCs. From the article "...lying to investors about a Theranos technology she hailed as a revolution in healthcare but which in practice produced dangerously inaccurate results." Duping investors clearly isn't the worst crime committed here. The true crime is puting sick people at even more health risk simply because she wanted to be a billionaire. I could care less about losing money, just like I don't cry when a stock or property I own plummets in value - there is risk (gamble), and I accept it when it doesn't work out in my favor unless someone is literally stealing from me intentionally and even then I admit partial negligence as I should have done more due dillegence to prevent being dupped. However, when my family consults a healthcare provider, I trust them to not intentionally harm us. So, yes, I join the chorus and say good riddence Elizabeth and we'll done law enforcement.
- what-imright 4y ago
- jdlshore 4y agoThis is a pretty bold claim. Unwrapping the rhetoric, it sounds like you’re claiming that Holmes was given a harsher sentence because she’s a woman. However, the case is built on deliberate defrauding of investors to the tune of billions of dollars, if I understand it correctly. (I’ll admit to not paying close attention.) Do you have any examples of crimes of similar scope and how they were treated?
- what-imright 4y agoAre you telling me billion dollar investments were made into a highly experimental technology on the word of a teenage startup founder that dropped out of university? No, those investing clearly failed their own independent due diligence or else knew they were on a ‘punt’ (high stakes gamble with large payout). Had Elizabeth been a man, the loss outcome would've been accepted as part of the SV casino breaks, but because she’s a counterfeit (wo-) person, they called shenanigans to save face.
- lern_too_spel 4y agoLying to investors is different from giving optimistic estimates on correct data shared with investors.
- beart 4y agoAre you suggesting that other men should be punished for the same crime, or that no crime has taken place?
- what-imright 4y agoI’m saying this outcome wouldn’t have been prosecuted had she been a man. She’s being sentenced for being female, not for fraud.