6 ms·

Holmes Belongs in Prison, Not $13,000-a-Month Manor, US Says

46 points by JamesAdir 4y ago

JamesAdir 4y ago
https://archive.md/Ze6XF https://archive.md/Ze6XF
zapdrive 4y ago
Good. Send her to prison, where she belongs.
- decide1000 4y ago
  It's actually not good. It is totally legal to appeal a conviction. The size of a bank account is not a measurement in this. Stranger is US law in general, where the outcome of convictions depends on the emotional stability of a judge and the thoughts of a jury. Law is an emotional process in the US. In Europe there are no emotions involved in the sentencing. I think this reflects the responds like "Send her to prison, where she belongs". There is an appeal, so let's see if she really belongs there.
  - RansomStark 4y ago
    > There is an appeal, so let's see if she really belongs there. I think you're missing the point, yes it is legal for anyone to appeal a conviction. In the US (and I assume most of the rest of the world) that is dependent on your ability to pay a lawyer to do that for you and your likely outcome is impacted by the price you are able to pay for that lawyer. The other point is, this is a conversation about a two tier justice system. Rich people get to spend their appeal in a mansion, poor people sit in prison waiting on an appeal. So I would say, she's been convicted of a crime and has been given time for it, send her to prison like everyone else. Once her appeal is successful, then let her go back to that life of luxury.
    - lfodofod 4y ago
      Why should we push down wealthy people just because the poor have it worse? Would it not be better to focus on improving the conditions of the poor?
      - TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
        Conservative commentators everywhere would no doubt be delighted at the suggestion that all poor people should wait out an appeal in a $13k/mth mansion.
        lfodofod 4y ago
        Wait out an appeal at their home. Rich people have fancier homes? Boo hoo.
      - gizmo 4y ago
        Because the rich won’t have any incentive to change the system otherwise.
        lfodofod 4y ago
        As if the poor couldn’t vote to change things if they wanted to.
        lnxg33k1 4y ago
        One of the worst things I've learnt about US, is that like the poor can't just go to vote, as it is not a public holiday but they need to ask for permission from their bosses? Like there are a lot of bad things I've learnt along the years about of US treats poors, and I think this one is on the podium
        niij 4y ago
        Voting is done at a local/state level in the US. 30 states mandate employer provided time off, while 20 do not. https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/payroll/does-your-state-require-time-off-to-vote/ https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/payroll/does-your-state...
  - TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
    I assume you're unfamiliar with the British system, where it's not unusual for people who can't afford bail to be jailed for years before their case even comes to trial. Does the US not operate in the same way? Is it not the case that rich people can hire expensive lawyers at every stage of the process while poor people can't? Clearly the size a bank account is very relevant indeed.
    - stu432 4y ago
      It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the UK system either. Bail in the UK means adherence to specific conditions, i.e. live somewhere the police can find you, stay away from the victim and don't leave the country. It doesn't involve cash changing hands. If you've done something very bad, or are a big flight risk you will not be granted bail, but again, not a money issue. The person you're responding to is referencing that sentencing is done by a judge who is supposed to be more objective when determining sentence, as opposed to emotional juries who simply determine if they are guilty or not of accused crimes.
      - lfodofod 4y ago
        Cash bail totally exists in the UK, even if uncommon. I’ve had to hand over money to get a friend out after he was arrested due to an extradition request. > If you've done something very bad, or are a big flight risk you will not be granted bail, but again, not a money issue It absolutely is a money issue. The bigger surety you can put up, the less those things matter.
        stu432 4y ago
        It absolutely is not. It's about risk of absconding. Secondly, no, cash bail is not a thing in the UK. Someone being arrested in the UK for extradition is not part of the UK justice system, they are merely passing through at the request of a foreign nation. Unsurprisingly, foreign nationals can't have their passport taken away by a foreign country, who'd have thought?!?!??!
        4y ago
  - yucky 4y ago
    > It is totally legal to appeal a conviction. Yes and people do it all the time from within their prison cell. As should she. She's been convicted, so the presumption of innocence is gone. Now the onus is on her to prove the trial wasn't handled legally. Which is a claim she is free to make while serving her sentence.
- ihatepython 4y ago
  I think they should send her to prison, but conditionally release her for 48 hours so that she can help to solve a crime.
  - a9h74j 4y ago
    Bonus: She both solves a crime and diagnoses a medical condition from drops of blood found at the crime scene.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - listenallyall 4y ago
    48 Hrs. is a fantastic movie -- maybe Eddie Murphy's best (and first) -- but I need you to explain the connection between that film and Elizabeth Holmes or her current situation.
    - ihatepython 4y ago
      I'd have to say that Eddie Murphy's best movie is actually 'Best Defense'. But perhaps the plot for Holmes could be that she has 48 hours to find out who is responsible for Covid-19. Teaming up with Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, the unlikely trio find themselves in a race against time. Was it Fauci? Or someone else?
tluyben2 4y ago
> There are not two systems of justice — one for the wealthy and one for the poor Would be nice if they would say this when a poor person, because they cannot afford a team of lawyers, gets a completely over the top punishment on shoddy evidence.
- hgsgm 4y ago
  They who? "They" always say that.
3327 4y ago
[dead]
ekianjo 4y ago
> there is one criminal justice system in this country. That's an illusion. There's almost no wealthy criminal that sees the walls of a prison - and if they do, they find ways to get out very quickly thanks to their connections.
- atoav 4y ago
  I wanted to say, this is a point one could try to argue in countries where e.g. the fine for speed tickets is proportional to the income, but in the US there is just a lack of hard evidence to support that statement (and a lot of evidence that supports the opposite of the statment). The way I perceive it the US justice system is too prone to be toyed around with by people with money. A lot of the stuff people pull off in the US would land you in contempt of court if you just tried it elsewhere on the world. Innocent until proven guily, I get all of that, but what money factually buys you in the US is ridiculous
  - veidr 4y ago
    Also, while we learn “innocent until proven guilty” in elementary school in the US, it doesn’t apply to poor people. Under our peculiar pay-to-play “cash bail” system, it only applies to those who can afford the fee. For the rest of the people it’s very much the opposite: stay imprisoned (and lose your job etc) until not proven guilty. To avoid this, many people take a loan from a “bail bondsman” that comes with a service fee of around 10% of the bail —- which might easily be tens of thousands of dollars and leave a poor person in crippling debt for years or forever — regardless of guilt.
- helloworld11 4y ago
  In general, wealthy people make up a small proportion of the population and tend (though not always) towards greater intelligence, or at least education, than the average. Both of these factors make them less likely to show up in prisons in general. It doesn't have to be about connections and special favors. Sure, many wealthy people can afford better legal defense and the justice system definitely makes things easier for them, but the rich do indeed go to real-people prison if they fuck up badly enough and get caught doing it.
blitzar 4y ago
Would it be better if it was a $500-a-Month dump?
- black_13 4y ago
  [dead]
say_it_as_it_is 4y ago
It seems like all of America is afraid of prison sentencing white collar crime because of the number of people who may wind up in prison. Sentencing towards moral high ground frightens those in power.
missedthecue 4y ago
Interesting to me that the Venn diagram of the group of people who want "prison reform" and an end to overincarceration and the group of people who want Holmes locked up with the key thrown away is basically a perfect circle. Is Holmes such an imminent danger to society that she needs locked up and cordoned off from our communities?
- mstipetic 4y ago
  Punishment isn’t only about the crime in the past. Punishment is used as deterrence against possible future crimes by others - to show what will happen if they do something similar
  - scotty79 4y ago
    I don't think it should be that, because that can cause people who committed not very serious crimes to be punished disproportionately as an example. It's unjust.
    - mstipetic 4y ago
      I think people who commit crimes should be seriously punished simply because of all the resources we have to spend to be vigilant against such things.
      - scotty79 4y ago
        Sure. But the punishment should be proportional to the deed not to how underfinanced is your law enforcement budget.
- seanhunter 4y ago
  I don't think those groups are the same except perhaps in your mind. If you have some evidence otherwise it might be worth providing it. Secondly, those positions are not mutually exclusive or even intellectually inconsistent. You can think there are too many people in jail general (eg for certain crimes and certain groups in society) and still think that for certain specific cases, jail is appropriate. Thirdly, as a sibling has pointed out, protection of society is not the only or even the primary reason a jail sentence might be appropriate in a given case. I believe prosecutors believe flight risk is the primary reason jail is appropriate in this case, at least partly because her partner bought a ticket to Mexico in January for her which was only cancelled after the government intervened.[1] Her counsel said it was in expectation of being found not guilty so she was able to attend a friend's wedding but the bummer for that theory is that it was a one-way ticket. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/elizabeth-holmes-bought-one-way-ticket-mexico-theranos-fraud-rcna66765 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/elizabeth-hol...
gunishment 4y ago
[flagged]
black_13 4y ago
[dead]
jmpman 4y ago
How many appeals does one get? Is this something which a wealthy person could use to push off prison indefinitely? She was convicted. Let her appeal her conviction from within a jail cell.
indigodaddy 4y ago
Wow she tells her probation officers that she wants to figure out how to continue monetizing her patents. That’s all you need to know about Holmes right there…
- CraigRo 4y ago
  She's allowed to make money legitimately until she exhausted her appeals. She still owes a lot in restitution
  - indigodaddy 4y ago
    It’s legal for her to try to profit from her Theranos patents?
scotty79 4y ago
I'm not really informed about this case. Did she do any damage to people or just to capital?
- acdha 4y ago
  Both: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1476973026 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1... That to me is what pushes me over the edge to jail for her: defrauding investors arguably should not involve jail time but I think knowingly playing games with medical procedures, food safety, etc. should be one of the electrified third rails that everyone knows is not worth any profit.
  - from 4y ago
    Are you equally as mad that there are people who walk away with 5 years in prison after performing 8-9 figures worth of unnecessary lab tests in order to bill Medicare? Or physicians who get millions in kickbacks to prescribe expensive compounded drugs that might not even work? Holmes is a drop in the bucket of overall healthcare fraud (this kind of crime has a lot of recidivists) and is probably one of the less egregious cases.
    - acdha 4y ago
      I do want them to face consequences, yes. Whether that’s jail time or financial ruination depends on harm - an extra test which doesn’t harm the patient is more waste than endangerment, and in this hypothetical case you also have the much harder question of proving intent. One of the other inequities of the American system is that white-collar crime usually requires you to prove not only that someone did something but also that they had criminal intention. Unless someone leaves documents showing they intended to bilk Medicare that is a tricky case of proving they didn’t reasonably want the data to rule out a possible diagnosis.
xwowsersx 4y ago
Conceiving two children while you're facing a possibly very long time in prison seems like an incredibly selfish thing to do. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

46 points by JamesAdir 4y ago

JamesAdir 4y ago

https://archive.md/Ze6XF https://archive.md/Ze6XF

zapdrive 4y ago

Good. Send her to prison, where she belongs.

decide1000 4y ago
It's actually not good. It is totally legal to appeal a conviction. The size of a bank account is not a measurement in this. Stranger is US law in general, where the outcome of convictions depends on the emotional stability of a judge and the thoughts of a jury. Law is an emotional process in the US. In Europe there are no emotions involved in the sentencing. I think this reflects the responds like "Send her to prison, where she belongs". There is an appeal, so let's see if she really belongs there.
- RansomStark 4y ago
  > There is an appeal, so let's see if she really belongs there. I think you're missing the point, yes it is legal for anyone to appeal a conviction. In the US (and I assume most of the rest of the world) that is dependent on your ability to pay a lawyer to do that for you and your likely outcome is impacted by the price you are able to pay for that lawyer. The other point is, this is a conversation about a two tier justice system. Rich people get to spend their appeal in a mansion, poor people sit in prison waiting on an appeal. So I would say, she's been convicted of a crime and has been given time for it, send her to prison like everyone else. Once her appeal is successful, then let her go back to that life of luxury.
  - lfodofod 4y ago
    Why should we push down wealthy people just because the poor have it worse? Would it not be better to focus on improving the conditions of the poor?
    - TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
      Conservative commentators everywhere would no doubt be delighted at the suggestion that all poor people should wait out an appeal in a $13k/mth mansion.
      - lfodofod 4y ago
        Wait out an appeal at their home. Rich people have fancier homes? Boo hoo.
    - gizmo 4y ago
      Because the rich won’t have any incentive to change the system otherwise.
      - lfodofod 4y ago
        As if the poor couldn’t vote to change things if they wanted to.
        lnxg33k1 4y ago
        One of the worst things I've learnt about US, is that like the poor can't just go to vote, as it is not a public holiday but they need to ask for permission from their bosses? Like there are a lot of bad things I've learnt along the years about of US treats poors, and I think this one is on the podium
        niij 4y ago
        Voting is done at a local/state level in the US. 30 states mandate employer provided time off, while 20 do not. https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/payroll/does-your-state-require-time-off-to-vote/ https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/payroll/does-your-state...
- TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
  I assume you're unfamiliar with the British system, where it's not unusual for people who can't afford bail to be jailed for years before their case even comes to trial. Does the US not operate in the same way? Is it not the case that rich people can hire expensive lawyers at every stage of the process while poor people can't? Clearly the size a bank account is very relevant indeed.
  - stu432 4y ago
    It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the UK system either. Bail in the UK means adherence to specific conditions, i.e. live somewhere the police can find you, stay away from the victim and don't leave the country. It doesn't involve cash changing hands. If you've done something very bad, or are a big flight risk you will not be granted bail, but again, not a money issue. The person you're responding to is referencing that sentencing is done by a judge who is supposed to be more objective when determining sentence, as opposed to emotional juries who simply determine if they are guilty or not of accused crimes.
    - lfodofod 4y ago
      Cash bail totally exists in the UK, even if uncommon. I’ve had to hand over money to get a friend out after he was arrested due to an extradition request. > If you've done something very bad, or are a big flight risk you will not be granted bail, but again, not a money issue It absolutely is a money issue. The bigger surety you can put up, the less those things matter.
      - stu432 4y ago
        It absolutely is not. It's about risk of absconding. Secondly, no, cash bail is not a thing in the UK. Someone being arrested in the UK for extradition is not part of the UK justice system, they are merely passing through at the request of a foreign nation. Unsurprisingly, foreign nationals can't have their passport taken away by a foreign country, who'd have thought?!?!??!
        4y ago
- yucky 4y ago
  > It is totally legal to appeal a conviction. Yes and people do it all the time from within their prison cell. As should she. She's been convicted, so the presumption of innocence is gone. Now the onus is on her to prove the trial wasn't handled legally. Which is a claim she is free to make while serving her sentence.
ihatepython 4y ago
I think they should send her to prison, but conditionally release her for 48 hours so that she can help to solve a crime.
- a9h74j 4y ago
  Bonus: She both solves a crime and diagnoses a medical condition from drops of blood found at the crime scene.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- listenallyall 4y ago
  48 Hrs. is a fantastic movie -- maybe Eddie Murphy's best (and first) -- but I need you to explain the connection between that film and Elizabeth Holmes or her current situation.
  - ihatepython 4y ago
    I'd have to say that Eddie Murphy's best movie is actually 'Best Defense'. But perhaps the plot for Holmes could be that she has 48 hours to find out who is responsible for Covid-19. Teaming up with Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, the unlikely trio find themselves in a race against time. Was it Fauci? Or someone else?

tluyben2 4y ago

> There are not two systems of justice — one for the wealthy and one for the poor Would be nice if they would say this when a poor person, because they cannot afford a team of lawyers, gets a completely over the top punishment on shoddy evidence.

hgsgm 4y ago
They who? "They" always say that.

3327 4y ago

[dead]

ekianjo 4y ago

> there is one criminal justice system in this country. That's an illusion. There's almost no wealthy criminal that sees the walls of a prison - and if they do, they find ways to get out very quickly thanks to their connections.

atoav 4y ago
I wanted to say, this is a point one could try to argue in countries where e.g. the fine for speed tickets is proportional to the income, but in the US there is just a lack of hard evidence to support that statement (and a lot of evidence that supports the opposite of the statment). The way I perceive it the US justice system is too prone to be toyed around with by people with money. A lot of the stuff people pull off in the US would land you in contempt of court if you just tried it elsewhere on the world. Innocent until proven guily, I get all of that, but what money factually buys you in the US is ridiculous
- veidr 4y ago
  Also, while we learn “innocent until proven guilty” in elementary school in the US, it doesn’t apply to poor people. Under our peculiar pay-to-play “cash bail” system, it only applies to those who can afford the fee. For the rest of the people it’s very much the opposite: stay imprisoned (and lose your job etc) until not proven guilty. To avoid this, many people take a loan from a “bail bondsman” that comes with a service fee of around 10% of the bail —- which might easily be tens of thousands of dollars and leave a poor person in crippling debt for years or forever — regardless of guilt.
helloworld11 4y ago
In general, wealthy people make up a small proportion of the population and tend (though not always) towards greater intelligence, or at least education, than the average. Both of these factors make them less likely to show up in prisons in general. It doesn't have to be about connections and special favors. Sure, many wealthy people can afford better legal defense and the justice system definitely makes things easier for them, but the rich do indeed go to real-people prison if they fuck up badly enough and get caught doing it.

blitzar 4y ago

Would it be better if it was a $500-a-Month dump?

black_13 4y ago
[dead]

say_it_as_it_is 4y ago

It seems like all of America is afraid of prison sentencing white collar crime because of the number of people who may wind up in prison. Sentencing towards moral high ground frightens those in power.

missedthecue 4y ago

Interesting to me that the Venn diagram of the group of people who want "prison reform" and an end to overincarceration and the group of people who want Holmes locked up with the key thrown away is basically a perfect circle. Is Holmes such an imminent danger to society that she needs locked up and cordoned off from our communities?

mstipetic 4y ago
Punishment isn’t only about the crime in the past. Punishment is used as deterrence against possible future crimes by others - to show what will happen if they do something similar
- scotty79 4y ago
  I don't think it should be that, because that can cause people who committed not very serious crimes to be punished disproportionately as an example. It's unjust.
  - mstipetic 4y ago
    I think people who commit crimes should be seriously punished simply because of all the resources we have to spend to be vigilant against such things.
    - scotty79 4y ago
      Sure. But the punishment should be proportional to the deed not to how underfinanced is your law enforcement budget.
seanhunter 4y ago
I don't think those groups are the same except perhaps in your mind. If you have some evidence otherwise it might be worth providing it. Secondly, those positions are not mutually exclusive or even intellectually inconsistent. You can think there are too many people in jail general (eg for certain crimes and certain groups in society) and still think that for certain specific cases, jail is appropriate. Thirdly, as a sibling has pointed out, protection of society is not the only or even the primary reason a jail sentence might be appropriate in a given case. I believe prosecutors believe flight risk is the primary reason jail is appropriate in this case, at least partly because her partner bought a ticket to Mexico in January for her which was only cancelled after the government intervened.[1] Her counsel said it was in expectation of being found not guilty so she was able to attend a friend's wedding but the bummer for that theory is that it was a one-way ticket. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/elizabeth-holmes-bought-one-way-ticket-mexico-theranos-fraud-rcna66765 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/elizabeth-hol...

gunishment 4y ago

[flagged]

black_13 4y ago

[dead]

jmpman 4y ago

How many appeals does one get? Is this something which a wealthy person could use to push off prison indefinitely? She was convicted. Let her appeal her conviction from within a jail cell.

indigodaddy 4y ago

Wow she tells her probation officers that she wants to figure out how to continue monetizing her patents. That’s all you need to know about Holmes right there…

CraigRo 4y ago
She's allowed to make money legitimately until she exhausted her appeals. She still owes a lot in restitution
- indigodaddy 4y ago
  It’s legal for her to try to profit from her Theranos patents?

scotty79 4y ago

I'm not really informed about this case. Did she do any damage to people or just to capital?

acdha 4y ago
Both: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1476973026 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-patients-hurt-by-theranos-1... That to me is what pushes me over the edge to jail for her: defrauding investors arguably should not involve jail time but I think knowingly playing games with medical procedures, food safety, etc. should be one of the electrified third rails that everyone knows is not worth any profit.
- from 4y ago
  Are you equally as mad that there are people who walk away with 5 years in prison after performing 8-9 figures worth of unnecessary lab tests in order to bill Medicare? Or physicians who get millions in kickbacks to prescribe expensive compounded drugs that might not even work? Holmes is a drop in the bucket of overall healthcare fraud (this kind of crime has a lot of recidivists) and is probably one of the less egregious cases.
  - acdha 4y ago
    I do want them to face consequences, yes. Whether that’s jail time or financial ruination depends on harm - an extra test which doesn’t harm the patient is more waste than endangerment, and in this hypothetical case you also have the much harder question of proving intent. One of the other inequities of the American system is that white-collar crime usually requires you to prove not only that someone did something but also that they had criminal intention. Unless someone leaves documents showing they intended to bilk Medicare that is a tricky case of proving they didn’t reasonably want the data to rule out a possible diagnosis.

xwowsersx 4y ago

Conceiving two children while you're facing a possibly very long time in prison seems like an incredibly selfish thing to do. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.