4 ms·
Will she still be wealthy?
by andrewstuart 3y ago
Will she still be wealthy?
- nonrepeating 3y agoHer wealth was all on paper, that paper being equity in Theranos. By the time she was indicted her net worth was listed as zero.
- rkagerer 3y agoIn that case will this restitution likely never be paid?
- azernik 3y agoSome might, if they go after her new husband's rather substantial property.
- highwaylights 3y agoCan they do that? Genuinely unsure how US law works in this scenario. If the assets are in her husbands name, and are clearly not proceeds of the Theranos saga, can they be seized? (Especially given that they came into her life after all of this). My assumption would have been that she’d essentially remain penniless in her own name until after any limitations of claims had expired (20 years I believe from elsewhere in the thread) and the debt had been written off. Also does she spend the 11 years in jail or is it a half in/half out thing? I imagine there’s a lot of ways this still gets argued down to a much shorter time period but admittedly IANAL.
- jjeaff 3y agoI think you usually can go after the spouse's assets. But it seems less likely to be a viable avenue in this case since she met and married him after she was indicted.
- fastball 3y agoSeems unlikely they'll be able to do that, given they married after all the fraud took place, and I doubt Billy Evans would be stupid enough to put her name on any joint accounts or similar.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 3y agoShe could probably sell her old turtlenecks on Ebay. Perhaps she'll sell us a biography. But how can anyone believe any story coming from Elizabeth Holmes. She has some serious credibility problems. The sentencing judge believed her when she said she bought a one way ticket to Mexico after she was convicted to attend a friend's wedding, not to flee from incarceration. I believe the judge also referred to her as "brilliant", omitting the words "con artist".
- somedude895 3y agoSince entrepreneurs often take out loans with their equity as collateral it's likely she's actually negative zero.
- telltruth 3y agoNo. The court has kindly ordered to pay half billion to her billionaire investors. Apparently they are going in prison ONLY because they screwed investors. I truly don't understand this part. These investors agreed to give money based on risk/reward. They were on the board and happily paddled along. They literally didn't cared even when issues were brought to them. They thought it is just like WeWork/Uber founder doing bullshit for exponential growth. Only when press released news and they thought they might get some mud, they pressed eject button. No one should be going to prison because of these billionaire investors.
- vlovich123 3y agoOutright fraud is a very different thing in all contracts because there’s no meeting of the minds by definition. In fact, the incentives are typically the other way in private capital markets. Most investors are extremely wary of getting into lawsuits with companies they invest in even if they’re getting screwed / there’s fraud because it reflects poorly on you as an investor. Often better to just take the loss. No one is going to prison because of billionaire investors. They’re going to prison because of fraud. Now maybe the billionaire investors managed to get a DA to take on the case in the first place and that’s a problem, but not because she shouldn’t be going to prison.
- whyenot 3y agoNo, but her husband, Billy Evans, has some wealth.
- 2-718-281-828 3y agowealthy family, wealthy network - answer: yes