I’m not surprised, they always had a stronger case regarding investors because money talks sadly. Because her product was recalled so quickly there’s little evidence to suggest it had a direct impact on people’s health - which I guarantee WOULD have happened had she not been caught out when she was.
@@ewanoxborrow1024 what about endangerment though? When the test doesn't uncover the disease you loose your chance to start the proper treatment. And if it's the other way around, a patient will take medication for an issue they don't have which might also harm them. It seems patients weren't harmed only because many redone the tests elsewhere!
I have to hold hands and bring my children to bear with me... My guilt and "men things" that made me do fraud... etc etc sad sad, I have such a sad story can I have some sympathy of what I am going through? She reminds me of a certain some AH, yes. How she acted like victim so far as to get into the "me too" and anything she can get her hands on. LoL Hey, desperate times, desperate measures. LoL after all what would children do without mommy.
I remember one of Holmes’ professors at Stamford saying she noticed the majority of ppl who fell for her con were older, white and male. These two jurors fit that bill, and seem to fall for her con too. Luckily she didn’t get away with everything, although I’d prefer someone to be accountable for the patients’ plight
It's amazing that they thought she didn't hurt patients... They are the kind of people that would have met her and properly invested because shes the right visual...
How did they find that she didn’t “intentionally” mean to hurt patients? It was her moral responsibility as CEO to ensure that the technology provided correct lab results. She knew that it was flawed but was more important to save the company by raising capital to stay in business. Unbelievable
@@francescacastiglione7094 I agree. She knew her machines were putting out false readings, readings people depended upon as part of their medical profile. Any reasonable person should have known that those false readings could have led to serious health issues. For the jury to demand that she "intentionally" meant to hurt people is insane. It's as if an auto mechanic who knows your brakes are failing doesn't let you know and you suffer a sever crash shouldn't be held responsible, even though the intent of the mechanic may not have been to hurt anyone? You've just gotta shake your head and wonder about how these seemingly intelligent people came to such obviously wrong conclusions.
Ugh, this is frustrating. Okay, she didn't intend to hurt patients but she deliberately lied to them and didn't care if they were adversely impacted. That's plenty of intent to convict. I guess her acting coquettish and soft was enough to garner sympathy unfortunately.
@@buttersstotch6752 I will put it this way...most mothers knew their kids or grandchildren were being sexually abused by the father or grandfather or whomever. Who is the real monster the abuser or the one that hides the 'truth' that if outed would protect? I agree with you Dan. S. women been getting away with 'bad' real 'bad' forever.
To the two jurors who trusted her testimony, didn't think she was intentionally defrauding the patients and found it hard to convict her: Congratulations on being conned, manipulated and played. You failed at your job. Shame on you.
I agree whole heartedly She knew exactly what she was doing Making people think they have a life threatening disease She was obsessed with being like Steve Jobs It was a fantasy of hers Everyone is born an original She went out a photocopy
It could be that she didn't mean to hurt patients. The world isn't black and white and people not good and evil. Granted she should be punished for jeapizing patients intentionally or not...
@@jennifermoriarty2188 yeah it's weird the count dependet on intent being proven. Doctors can botch surgeries without intent and they still get punished.
Yes that's why i tell people I'm not a medical masseuse when they come to me for a massage or they ask to massage certain spots on their back i say Noooo i can't i can get in trouble i bet i can get more in troubles than her !!!! If i do damage i bet they'll let the patients talk not my Investors lol shame on this system really
Those jurors fell for her narcisisstic/psychopathic charm. People like that know how to mirror empathy. It's all part of the game they play to take advantage of others.
What Downfall? White Privilege has been really good to this lady. She is convicted on serious charges and was still allowed to walk out of court hand in hand with her family. The Barbie Doll has not seen a jail cell.
"I thought she was genuine, I trusted her.." Says every person after listening to a psychopath, including experts on psychopaths. When are the public going to wake up to how incredibly manipulative these personality types are ffs?
The jury found her "genuine"...PEOPLE ARE DUMB. Barf. How do they reconcile their perception of her authenticity with the duplicity they determined she was guilty of? And the lies that she told on the stand? And that she has never once expressed authentic remorse? I can't stand that this sociopath continues to "charm" so many people. Her facade is so transparent.
I actually don’t think she intended to hurt patients (I mean, who would hurt patients on purpose?), I think she got in way over her head, and her massive ego refused to back down when it should have, and that’s what put patients at risk. I think she knowingly lied to investors but believed she had a worthy cause, which is still lying on purpose, and in any case she was told again and again that she **didn’t** have a worthy cause. So, she’s where she needs to be.
She is not in the medical field. I work in the medical field. None of the patients are her and the jurors family. She lied, got blinded by money. Whether she did not intend to hurt anyone, the wrong choices she made still hurt those patients. Very dangerous. And yet people feel sorry for her. She is a good con then. This is the consequence of her wrong actions.
I was just thinking the same thing! That woman, did not care who she hurt, financially or otherwise. On top of everything she was a nightmare boss (to put mildly) and ruined Tyler Shultz’s relationship with his own grandfather (granted the grandfather was an old fool).
She hurt people. She knew her product didn’t work, yet she still tested her product on ACTUAL people. She deserves the same amount of compassion that she had for her patients..which is none
I am glad the jury's overall credibility rating for Holmes was low but she still managed to convince these two jurors at least that she was 'genuine' and so they didn't like convicting her! Even her proven lies, her body language on the stand, her obvious attempts at fake confusion - none of this made these 2 individuals read between the lines and guess her real nature?? So she managed to con at least some of them. I have nothing to say other than I hope the members of the jury NOW read all the material on her which they didn't have access to in the courtroom.
I can’t help but think that her pretty face plays at least a part in all of their so-called sympathy. Her lies creep all the way into the jurors’ room. Scary
Surely there was intent when it came to duping patients as she knew her wonder machine spit out random results and people would base medical decisions on those false results. I know the prosecution wasn't able to ponder too long on the patients and the patients weren't allowed to say how much devastation the wrong results impacted them, a misstep by the court.
And the way some of her bilked investors, the so called victims, behaved on the stand was pathetic. Literally whining that they don’t care about the money, it’s that she made them look bad because they fell for her bullshit.
The maximum she can be sentenced I believe is twenty years. But I agree since she is white, female and privileged she won’t get much. If she does serve any time it will be like when Bernie Madoff went to jail. In fact she may just get probation. From their viewpoint she didn’t hurt all the common people that got incorrect results as they see it them, only victims here are the old rich greedy white men she scammed.
No “defrauding the patients”? And all clinical labs are regulated. How did Theranos get approved to offer lab tests? Why not investigate the regulators’ “failure”?
You think that was a failure?! wait till you see what they did with Purdue pharma and the sacklers with their special logo on OxyContin packaging and marketing practices.
@@edward8972 I agree that the regulators had to be bought off to approve fraud as real, which is why I put “failure” in quotes. The proposed settlement with the Sacklers was turned down by a Federal judge bc it did not include prison time for them. Thanks for your input!
@@Preservestlandry Thanks for the info! Sounds like the usual corrupt BS we’ve come to expect from the weasel governments we have. These tests should have been subject to regulation as they were not developed by Theranos but were run on others’ machines. That’s fraud. And how about the doctors whose decisions were based on fraudulent results? Bottom line: the scummy rich who deservedly lost only their money (that they don’t even miss) get a favorable verdict but the people whose health and profession are compromised are told to FOAD. Ain’t that America!
@@bobvido9875 not the racecard? Are you serious? Do you think a person of color would get this treatment and that ridiculous jury? Please, stop, that's hilarious.
@@bobvido9875 the only brown one in her circle she tossed under the bus. I think the racecard is justified....even thought that Balwani character certainly deserved it and I hoped he got a rude awakening.
She's not even attractive. Journalists use the cheap and easy rubric of: "thin?" - check! "blonde?" - check! And then they get to write another article with a sexual angle about the maverick (and hot!) entrepreneur (who men can't resist!) singing her siren song of seduction (watch out old white males, she's too hot to to handle!)
So, some of the jurors were gullible. Long ago I was the foreman of a jury where some of the jurors were very gullible. If the Holmes jury had had 1 of those jurors, that juror might have refused to convict on any charge, thus hanging the entire thing. Fortunately, the Holmes trial resulted in 4 convictions.
It’s interesting how little things like her physical presentation can help change gullible people’s perception of an individual. It’s no coincidence she didn’t show up with her typical stupid black turtleneck attire and bad flat hairdo. I agree it’s fortunate they didn’t completely fall for it, but it sounds like it was close.
They way that Holmes dealt with employees who questioned her machine’s accuracy and the way she treated Tyler Schultz plus her attempt to suppress the critical Wall Street Journal article is indicative of her true character.. her credibility should have been rated zero stars..
@@MsGirlnextdoor123 that just goes to show the insanity of the jury system. It does not care if the jurors are competent, they even must be ignorant of the case to be selected 🤦. The system prefers "unbiased" people whom it hides facts from by arbitrarily ruling them to be inadmissible and who are easily manipulated over competent people who have heard of the case and can check their biases or have the reasonable "bias" that EH harmed patients knowingly.
Exactly. The whistleblowers were not worried about investors. They blew the whistle because she was repeatedly told the machine didn’t work and she was putting patients in harm’s way and she ignored them or bullied or fired them. She was smart enough to know the consequences of her decisions. No scientist would have let her off of those charges. I still don’t understand how she has conned all these people. There’s nothing engaging or charismatic about her as far as I can tell. She just seems like an arrogant airhead.
When the iPhone got into customers hands, it was working. When her device was used on patients, it was not working and she knew it. It is amazing no one died as a result of those bogus results.
Actually another important thing is that smartphone typically do not cause life threatening problems even if not working. Many tech companies ship flawed products (have you ever used first generation OneNote...), but these products are typically harmless. Healthcare industry should be held to higher standards.
I'm glad there were some smart people on the jury. At the beginning when I heard that one juror got kicked out for playing Soduko, and one juror left for her "Buddhist beliefs", and another juror said that she was scared to send a woman to jail and didn't fully understand English, I was a little nervous
@@melmess4021 Have you even *been* to a drive-thru? 😉 (Kidding aside, English fluency is absolutely not a prerequisite for obtaining either LPR status or citizenship. It *is* however often a prerequisite for H1-B visas.)
@@mulemule i didn't know that i genuinely thought everyone who applies for that passport must speak fluently lol 😆😆 It always sounds so difficult and complicated from A to Z but it's not fair it's easier for you guys to move to us , to Europe ☹️😣😞
@@melmess4021 I can absolutely see where one might make that assumption. I, too, was stunned (and appalled) at who was originally seated on the jury after the "voir dire" process. Also, to clarify: A *passport* is an entirely different certifying document with a distinctly different qualifying process than either LPR or a so-called "Green Card" (which is not even actually green). English fluency's even *less* of a prerequisite for a passport. Think of it this way: do you speak fluent Croatian? Probably not. But could you obtain a passport allowing you to *visit* Croatia? Absolutely. (Also, if you think emigrating to Europe's "easier" for Americans, I recommend taking a look at Denmark's restrictions as a good counter opinion.)
The fact that she shows up to court with her hair all done up shows that she's a Narcissist and enjoys all the media attention. I honestly believe she didn't think they would find her guilty.
Uhm what? Wouldnt you do your hair if you went to court? I love how her being a crazy narcissict makes people think they're professional profilist 😂 most women would not go to court with their hair messed up
"I thought she was genuine"😲. Seriously!? And so did the investors and the employees and the public and everyone else! This woman is a master manipulator and she'll say whatever you want to hear. SMH.
She'd make a great news anchor. Intelligent speaker, good at manufacturing sincerity and credibility. She's clearly entitled, wealthy, and heartless. She's even got the pretty face, a nice speaking voice, and doesn't flinch at all when she knows she's lying. None of her claims ever sounded like real science, just another well accessorized scam.
@Welshwazza yes, her face is not pretty. It is mottled with darkness. We are fascinated with her because everyone is always drawn to darkness. Beware, her dark can never change to light.
Gosh! It's so mind boggling they acquitted her of harming patients and they were also primary victims. That juror also seemed more sympathetic than he should be with a criminal for future's sake.
She always knew her machines didn't do everything she promised/claimed, you shouldn't be able to walk away so easily after playing with someone's health
When considering the fact that she was unscrupulus in her pursuit of more funding and defrauding investors, it is easier to see that she did not care about what happened to the patients and saw them as casualties of war, therefore she should also be found guilty of defrauding patients. She basically took a "whatever it takes" approach to her investors regardless of what a faulty product could do to potential patients. Guilty on all counts IMHO. But then, I dont have all the evidence in front of me.
Maybe the prosecution should have worded the charge “due to gross negligence” and/or intent. Since the jurors couldn’t get past “intent” for the patients.
As long as you didn't mean to hurt patients, you don't get charged with it? I'm genuinely confused how that works in the court of law. Isn't there a lesser charge for causing patient harm, similar to manslaughter vs. murder?
The main purpose of this trial and found her guilty of some of the counts are to make an example to any similar fraud in the coming future. Personally, I don't know her in person but after reviewed news articles and video. I found her guilty of majority of the counts.
*Daddy taught her well. Her father was a vice president with Enron! The apple does not fall far from the tree, and One bad Apple spoils the whole bunch*
Yes, but there is a difference between malpractice/mistakes and fraud. Just because tech doesn’t work it doesn’t mean it’s fraud, it could be genuine mistake. So it’s not as simple as does the tech work or not. You have to prove there was an intent to cause harm. That what is hard.
@@Oktaviii if the technology doesn't work, don't put it out. Holmes railroaded the launch way before it was ready. She knew of the wide range of inconsistencies in the device and insisted it be used on patients anyway. This isn't some cheap stereo system in which buyer beware, you get what you pay for. Rather, it's a medical device. One that should've had FDA approval before any patients were involved. Fraud. Her company Jerry rigged other companies' devices, to short cut their process and at least get some convincing readings out, but used competitors devices incorrectly. Patients thought they'd get the one finger prick, doctors sent patients to Theranos to get cheaper tests, only to end up getting draws multiple times. Waste of time and money, not to mention the health scares that could've resulted in unnecessary procedures and consequencial/irreversible medical decisions.
The science doesn't even close to work. Would need decades more work first. But throw a pretty little liar in, and she'll sell that junk to the ignorant rich today, while making sure it'll never be credible again. More women in STEM fields, sure, but try to screen out the gold diggers first.
@@MinkytheMinkY I’m not arguing that she is not guilty but I’m saying that determining what is fraud and what is genuine mistake it’s not that simple. One can believe that product is actually working and even FDA can make a mistake by labeling something as safe and later discovering that is not. Its not simply about whether or not product works well, it’s about whether or not it’s malpractice vs international harm. For example if a patient dies on operating table was it a result of surgeons mistake or surgeon’s intent to harm the patient? Those are completely different scenarios and not that easy to distinguish one from the other
Juror: “I thought she was genuine, I trusted her.” Reality: She is known for manipulating her voice and demeanor during interviews and projecting that demeanor to investors, associates and co-workers. Bottom-line: They were conned, just like Mattis, et al. She’s good at manipulation and that is f’n scary folks.
So, they believed she didn't intend to hurt people. However, she did put money before patients health, knowing that many were relying on her machine to work, when she knew it didn't. So she knew she was hurting people.
Whether she “intended” to or not… she put patients lives in danger!!! Cannot believe she got off on those charges. Also the jury was sympathetic and believed her!?!? WHAT? She literally lied and scammed investigators out of millions of dollars on an idea she clearly knew didn’t work!!!
Her new makeover - younger boyfriend, baby, looser hairstyle, more feminine dress - worked a charm with the older white male jurors! A true con artist.
I wish it was guilty on the patient counts. But not guilty on the investors. cause I like the idea she stiffed this mega wealthy people, who have been stiffing normal people their whole lives.
How could you not intend to hurt patients when you have demonstrated zero regard for what a doctor may or may not prescribe based on false lab results? That juror has no critical thinking skills.
Can anyone explain to me why so many people believes she’s a genius? She’s a High School graduate. She didn’t invent anything. She became a billionaire through fraudulent and lies about her company. Investors were the sole source of income. Her company didn’t earn anything. However I will say she’s a genius in deception. She was accepted to Stanford(I think that’s the college she attended for a year). So based on that she’s obviously smart. Genius I don’t think so. It’s beyond me how she scammed some of the most powerful and educated investors. It seems to me that before you invest you should research the company, check their books, talk to employees. Make sure your investments has a ROI. Most of her investors know better than to blindly believe what they hear. They were lazy and believed what she told them rather than investigate her company for facts and transparency. Why didn’t they seek medical advice to determine if her claims are even possible. Have an independent company test her technology. I could go on and on. That is a very basic protocol for investors. Their laziness came at a high price and hurt a lot of people.
I’m just so surprised no one figured her out early on. Over the years every time I’d see her talk I always thought there was something wrong. I think at least on some level she is insane.
🔴 Considering everything she did, she had to be found guilty on ALL counts ❗But is seems that unfortunately her psychopathy affected even the jurors. But having said that, now let's say that AT LEAST she got 4.
The jury thought Holmes didn't know her machines didn't work in Walgreens! Wow! Really? When her machines didn't work in Afghanistan or on Medevec helicopters but that then they worked in Walgreens? I understand that she didn't have her devices in the military areas as she described to investors. But, guess what she is a charlatan! Although, I don't get it how if she was ready and willing to bilk small investors out of their life savings why then couldn't jurists figure out that she did find it very okay to sell her snake oil to patients? I know she is a good con artist and they were taken. They are human. Each Jurist if they need to clear their conscience about making a human mistake and voting wrong regarding her knowledge that the machines weren't working need to talk to the employees that kept telling Holmes that the machines didn't work: Tyler Shultz, Erika, etc...and they must know that Ian Gibbons knew the machines did not work and that the heavy load on his conscience contributed to Ian taking his life. I never met Ian...I wish I did. I still think this country needs to memorialize him for trying the best he could to do what was right and fight for others that were being harmed by Elizabeth Ann Holmes. At the end of the day, Holmes 100 percent knew that her machines didn't work and was risking the health and lives of others for her own ego, mostly for the money that supported that ego.
Of course she knew. I personally think the jury stuck too close to the details and didn't join the dots. That is, they went through all facts and evidence meticulously for EACH count (which has its merits of course, because this resulted in 4 Guilty verdicts), but they didn't connect the counts to paint a full picture and particularly, didn't assess the motivations and thoughts of the person behind it. I don't know if thus process was part of jury instructions, or if this was the only way they felt they could handle the mountain of evidence - but I am gobsmacked how anyone with an ounce of EQ can be taken in by Holmes.
@@MsGirlnextdoor123 I've been taken in by women just like her. And, I don't learn because the next one that comes along. I believe. So this world needs to start looking at women as they do men: Willing an Capable of hurting others.
She was CEO of this medical company with no degree whatsoever in the medical field even at the basic level. I’ll bet many thought she was by the way she acted and threw her weight around in the office
It is so sad that older males like the ones on her board and unfortunately the two jurors they interviewed were so easily conned by her. I would like to be able to respect men like them but it is like Lizzy Holmes’ professor said when they interviewed her it appears they were thinking with something south of their heads. She didn’t fool her professor for a minute. It didn’t bother any of them at all that she had no medical training whatsoever.
If the jurors believed she (EH) defrauded the investors by flaunting the non-functioning blood technology, with the same logic she is guilty of defrauding the patients by approving the same technology which put several of them in harms way. She knew that Edition machine was not working well giving a lot of false blood results resulting on her pulling out millions of tests. How is she as the CEO not responsible? It baffles me how jurors could not connect the logic or connection.
Wow I can’t believe both those men said they felt she was true in her beliefs - I shouldn’t be surprised though… she’s clearly very good at manipulating older (white) men 🙄 thank goodness they came to the verdict they did
@2:18 the fact that they didnt care if the machine is working or not could end up misdiagnosing a patient resulting to a mistreatment or delay of treatment, its the same as "hurting" a patient .
What I don't understand is (and I've not looked tbh) was there EVER a credible product/patent/prototype/software/hardware combo or even a theoretical proof of function that gave even the slightest notion it could deliver what it promised. As far as I can see, what it said it could do is technologically and biologically impossible by todays knowledge so what was the novel innovative tech. If not, surely the whole thing was a scam from the get go.
That jury was hoodwinked big time. Lucky for her, the jurists were not the brightest bulbs on the tree. You could see that in just these two short interviews.
Stupid set of jurors the danger to patients charge should have been front and center I bet you if one of their own families was given the false reports the verdict might have been different,
I’m very very surprised they acquitted her of defrauding patients. There was a clear and direct line from her to the patients.
I’m not surprised, they always had a stronger case regarding investors because money talks sadly.
Because her product was recalled so quickly there’s little evidence to suggest it had a direct impact on people’s health - which I guarantee WOULD have happened had she not been caught out when she was.
They couldn’t prove intent to fraud that’s why the charge was dropped
Me to!
@@ewanoxborrow1024 what about endangerment though? When the test doesn't uncover the disease you loose your chance to start the proper treatment. And if it's the other way around, a patient will take medication for an issue they don't have which might also harm them. It seems patients weren't harmed only because many redone the tests elsewhere!
Libatards
Congratulation on "believing" someone who BELIEVES her own lies.
She is a Sociopath!
Entitled white woman karen who thought she was above everyone else. She deserves a long sentence. Sociopath!
I have to hold hands and bring my children to bear with me... My guilt and "men things" that made me do fraud... etc etc sad sad, I have such a sad story can I have some sympathy of what I am going through? She reminds me of a certain some AH, yes. How she acted like victim so far as to get into the "me too" and anything she can get her hands on. LoL
Hey, desperate times, desperate measures. LoL after all what would children do without mommy.
These jurors were so stupid by not convicting her on defrauding the patients .
SMH
I remember one of Holmes’ professors at Stamford saying she noticed the majority of ppl who fell for her con were older, white and male. These two jurors fit that bill, and seem to fall for her con too. Luckily she didn’t get away with everything, although I’d prefer someone to be accountable for the patients’ plight
Weak minded men are easily manipulated.
what about the other 10?
@@sarac.3568 dude this video’s almost two years old, can’t even remember nor bothered to refer back to the details of the trial.
It's amazing that they thought she didn't hurt patients...
They are the kind of people that would have met her and properly invested because shes the right visual...
Right.
Yep. White thin blonde woman. Thought she was too privileged to get caught or punished.
How did they find that she didn’t “intentionally” mean to hurt patients? It was her moral responsibility as CEO to ensure that the technology provided correct lab results. She knew that it was flawed but was more important to save the company by raising capital to stay in business. Unbelievable
@@francescacastiglione7094 I agree. She knew her machines were putting out false readings, readings people depended upon as part of their medical profile. Any reasonable person should have known that those false readings could have led to serious health issues. For the jury to demand that she "intentionally" meant to hurt people is insane. It's as if an auto mechanic who knows your brakes are failing doesn't let you know and you suffer a sever crash shouldn't be held responsible, even though the intent of the mechanic may not have been to hurt anyone?
You've just gotta shake your head and wonder about how these seemingly intelligent people came to such obviously wrong conclusions.
Yup because a rich white blond could never be so sinister 🙄
Ugh, this is frustrating. Okay, she didn't intend to hurt patients but she deliberately lied to them and didn't care if they were adversely impacted. That's plenty of intent to convict. I guess her acting coquettish and soft was enough to garner sympathy unfortunately.
Double standard. People have spent centuries believing in pretty liars instead of ugly truths.
@@buttersstotch6752 Bingo!
@@buttersstotch6752 I will put it this way...most mothers knew their kids or grandchildren were being sexually abused by the father or grandfather or whomever. Who is the real monster the abuser or the one that hides the 'truth' that if outed would protect? I agree with you Dan. S. women been getting away with 'bad' real 'bad' forever.
That’s *always* the case when it’s 💁🏼♀️
@@sportsbadcalls334 um both? Why can’t both be the abuser?
To the two jurors who trusted her testimony, didn't think she was intentionally defrauding the patients and found it hard to convict her:
Congratulations on being conned, manipulated and played. You failed at your job. Shame on you.
I agree whole heartedly She knew exactly what she was doing Making people think they have a life threatening disease She was obsessed with being like Steve Jobs It was a fantasy of hers Everyone is born an original She went out a photocopy
Agree 100%! They were duped
Jurors are given instructions from the judge and have to match evidence to the choices of crime. Not enough evidence.
It could be that she didn't mean to hurt patients. The world isn't black and white and people not good and evil. Granted she should be punished for jeapizing patients intentionally or not...
@@jennifermoriarty2188 yeah it's weird the count dependet on intent being proven. Doctors can botch surgeries without intent and they still get punished.
He trusted her testimony to be honest.
WTF!?! Are you serious, she lied to everyone.
What did he think he was doing sitting in a court room? He wasn't there bcs she was an honest woman lol!
What happened about charging her for putting patients in danger?! Oh wait! This is about the investors and the rich!!!!
She was charged with that but was found not guilty. Listening is key 🔑
Yes that's why i tell people I'm not a medical masseuse when they come to me for a massage or they ask to massage certain spots on their back i say Noooo i can't i can get in trouble i bet i can get more in troubles than her !!!! If i do damage i bet they'll let the patients talk not my Investors lol shame on this system really
Blame these two jurors, they decided she was not guilty of that.
Isn't it always about protecting the Rich, the ruling class?!
The rich think they can get away with their crimes!! Isn't it always the case? White collar criminals seem to always get away with less time in jail?
Those jurors fell for her narcisisstic/psychopathic charm. People like that know how to mirror empathy. It's all part of the game they play to take advantage of others.
What Downfall? White Privilege has been really good to this lady. She is convicted on serious charges and was still allowed to walk out of court hand in hand with her family. The Barbie Doll has not seen a jail cell.
And she had a baby probably just for sympathy. I’d be surprised if she does 5 years.
She's a white lady at most probation
Contrast if this was about the non-white male with the foreign appearance and some sex charges... you got your answer.
@@ServantofGod07 Good looking???? I guess beauty really is in the eye of the beholder😬😬😬
@@ServantofGod07 Good looking???? I guess beauty really is in the eye of the beholder😬😬😬
"I thought she was genuine, I trusted her.." Says every person after listening to a psychopath, including experts on psychopaths.
When are the public going to wake up to how incredibly manipulative these personality types are ffs?
These two jurors were perfect for a defendant. Very soft spoken who want to see the best in everyone
It's the result of a culture that grooms its members to admire and elevate these kind of people because they usually make it financially.
@@Ultimime Totally agree
The jury found her "genuine"...PEOPLE ARE DUMB. Barf.
How do they reconcile their perception of her authenticity with the duplicity they determined she was guilty of? And the lies that she told on the stand? And that she has never once expressed authentic remorse?
I can't stand that this sociopath continues to "charm" so many people. Her facade is so transparent.
My thoughts exactly!!!!
"we believed her" "she wasn't trying to hurt patients" "she is not a evil person" - - I wonder why they thought that 2:54
Last i checked the consequences matter more than intent. If you hurt someone without meaning to, they're still hurt, and you're just reckless.
They fell for her con too!
I actually don’t think she intended to hurt patients (I mean, who would hurt patients on purpose?), I think she got in way over her head, and her massive ego refused to back down when it should have, and that’s what put patients at risk. I think she knowingly lied to investors but believed she had a worthy cause, which is still lying on purpose, and in any case she was told again and again that she **didn’t** have a worthy cause. So, she’s where she needs to be.
Drunk Driver: I never intended to hurt or kill anyone. I'm not an evil person. Therefore, I'm not guilty.
I agree with you S1L3NT G4M3R
Actions didn't intend to harm patients...wtf
WTF Indeed.
She defrauded the patients knowingly...PERIOD!
She is not in the medical field. I work in the medical field. None of the patients are her and the jurors family. She lied, got blinded by money. Whether she did not intend to hurt anyone, the wrong choices she made still hurt those patients. Very dangerous. And yet people feel sorry for her. She is a good con then. This is the consequence of her wrong actions.
Also, these jurors are going to be so furious with themselves after they read "Bad Blood".
If Mister "I-Thought-That-She-Was-Genuine-And-Trusted-Her-Testimony" can't even accurately read Holmes ... what chance does the printed word have? ;)
I was just thinking the same thing! That woman, did not care who she hurt, financially or otherwise. On top of everything she was a nightmare boss (to put mildly) and ruined Tyler Shultz’s relationship with his own grandfather (granted the grandfather was an old fool).
She hurt people. She knew her product didn’t work, yet she still tested her product on ACTUAL people. She deserves the same amount of compassion that she had for her patients..which is none
I am glad the jury's overall credibility rating for Holmes was low but she still managed to convince these two jurors at least that she was 'genuine' and so they didn't like convicting her! Even her proven lies, her body language on the stand, her obvious attempts at fake confusion - none of this made these 2 individuals read between the lines and guess her real nature?? So she managed to con at least some of them. I have nothing to say other than I hope the members of the jury NOW read all the material on her which they didn't have access to in the courtroom.
I can’t help but think that her pretty face plays at least a part in all of their so-called sympathy. Her lies creep all the way into the jurors’ room. Scary
Psychopaths are great liars.
We've seen someone con all the way to the top.
@@henryposadas3309 That they are. Narcissistic Sociopaths look for easy marks.
White blonde woman. Shes an expert manipulater.
Surely there was intent when it came to duping patients as she knew her wonder machine spit out random results and people would base medical decisions on those false results. I know the prosecution wasn't able to ponder too long on the patients and the patients weren't allowed to say how much devastation the wrong results impacted them, a misstep by the court.
2:14 "I don't believe the actions were intended to hurt patients."
Drunk Driver: I never intended to hurt or kill anyone. Therefore, I'm not guilty.
I agree but she can sit in jail and think about it for the rest of her young life.
@@thetrainwreck1469 That is what I will take away from this! Yes, she will have plenty of time to ponder her evil ways, because that is what she is.
Yeah the judge screwed up by not allowing patients to talk about the impact of fraudulent test results.
And the way some of her bilked investors, the so called victims, behaved on the stand was pathetic. Literally whining that they don’t care about the money, it’s that she made them look bad because they fell for her bullshit.
I hope she gets like 80 years! These kind of women are really dangerous
She won’t I’ll bet she gets 5 years and only serve 2 if she gets any jail time at all.
The maximum she can be sentenced I believe is twenty years. But I agree since she is white, female and privileged she won’t get much. If she does serve any time it will be like when Bernie Madoff went to jail. In fact she may just get probation. From their viewpoint she didn’t hurt all the common people that got incorrect results as they see it them, only victims here are the old rich greedy white men she scammed.
Just 4 counts? Lol.. Jury is a joke.
No “defrauding the patients”? And all clinical labs are regulated. How did Theranos get approved to offer lab tests? Why not investigate the regulators’ “failure”?
You think that was a failure?! wait till you see what they did with Purdue pharma and the sacklers with their special logo on OxyContin packaging and marketing practices.
@@edward8972 I agree that the regulators had to be bought off to approve fraud as real, which is why I put “failure” in quotes. The proposed settlement with the Sacklers was turned down by a Federal judge bc it did not include prison time for them. Thanks for your input!
They were called "laboratory- developed tests" which are not FDA regulated. Should they be regulated? Obviously, yes. But they're not.
@@Preservestlandry Thanks for the info! Sounds like the usual corrupt BS we’ve come to expect from the weasel governments we have. These tests should have been subject to regulation as they were not developed by Theranos but were run on others’ machines. That’s fraud. And how about the doctors whose decisions were based on fraudulent results?
Bottom line: the scummy rich who deservedly lost only their money (that they don’t even miss) get a favorable verdict but the people whose health and profession are compromised are told to FOAD.
Ain’t that America!
so let me get this straight if I can defraud people of money I can go in and out of court freely not being locked up ??
It depends, are you white with government connections? That would give you your answer 😕.
@@jeniestra. please not the racecard ! But she is a woman so she cant be guilty? Is that a answer to?
@@bobvido9875 not the racecard? Are you serious? Do you think a person of color would get this treatment and that ridiculous jury? Please, stop, that's hilarious.
@@jeniestra. I believe it's more about means and money than anything.
@@privard89 and race, all those old creeps wouldn't have made such a blind investment with a person of color. Let's not fool ourselves like they did.
I see some of male jurors were seduced by Holmes given how this guy talked about Holmes.
Elderly white men... do we see a pattern here?
@@MsGirlnextdoor123 oh come on ,the racecard again . 🤡
@@bobvido9875 the only brown one in her circle she tossed under the bus. I think the racecard is justified....even thought that Balwani character certainly deserved it and I hoped he got a rude awakening.
She's not even attractive. Journalists use the cheap and easy rubric of: "thin?" - check! "blonde?" - check! And then they get to write another article with a sexual angle about the maverick (and hot!) entrepreneur (who men can't resist!) singing her siren song of seduction (watch out old white males, she's too hot to to handle!)
@@AMurderOfLobs I guess you have to be there in person in order to feel her distortion field and experience her charisma first hand.
So, some of the jurors were gullible. Long ago I was the foreman of a jury where some of the jurors were very gullible. If the Holmes jury had had 1 of those jurors, that juror might have refused to convict on any charge, thus hanging the entire thing. Fortunately, the Holmes trial resulted in 4 convictions.
It’s interesting how little things like her physical presentation can help change gullible people’s perception of an individual. It’s no coincidence she didn’t show up with her typical stupid black turtleneck attire and bad flat hairdo.
I agree it’s fortunate they didn’t completely fall for it, but it sounds like it was close.
Entitled white woman karen who thought she was above everyone else. She deserves a long sentence. Sociopath!
They way that Holmes dealt with employees who questioned her machine’s accuracy and the way she treated Tyler Schultz plus her attempt to suppress the critical Wall Street Journal article is indicative of her true character.. her credibility should have been rated zero stars..
The jury didn't know any of this. They only had access to the facts that were part of the evidence.
@@MsGirlnextdoor123 that just goes to show the insanity of the jury system. It does not care if the jurors are competent, they even must be ignorant of the case to be selected 🤦. The system prefers "unbiased" people whom it hides facts from by arbitrarily ruling them to be inadmissible and who are easily manipulated over competent people who have heard of the case and can check their biases or have the reasonable "bias" that EH harmed patients knowingly.
The jury should have been science majors...
Exactly. The whistleblowers were not worried about investors. They blew the whistle because she was repeatedly told the machine didn’t work and she was putting patients in harm’s way and she ignored them or bullied or fired them. She was smart enough to know the consequences of her decisions. No scientist would have let her off of those charges.
I still don’t understand how she has conned all these people. There’s nothing engaging or charismatic about her as far as I can tell. She just seems like an arrogant airhead.
When the iPhone got into customers hands, it was working. When her device was used on patients, it was not working and she knew it. It is amazing no one died as a result of those bogus results.
Actually another important thing is that smartphone typically do not cause life threatening problems even if not working. Many tech companies ship flawed products (have you ever used first generation OneNote...), but these products are typically harmless. Healthcare industry should be held to higher standards.
"We need to keep it simple, no its really complex." They fell for it.
I'm glad there were some smart people on the jury. At the beginning when I heard that one juror got kicked out for playing Soduko, and one juror left for her "Buddhist beliefs", and another juror said that she was scared to send a woman to jail and didn't fully understand English, I was a little nervous
In retrospect, with THIS jury. we really dodged a bullet as Holmes couldve been acquitted of all charges. At least they found her guilty of four.
I thought they only let people be jurors with American citizenship ? And in order to get that you need to speak very good English ????
@@melmess4021 Have you even *been* to a drive-thru? 😉
(Kidding aside, English fluency is absolutely not a prerequisite for obtaining either LPR status or citizenship. It *is* however often a prerequisite for H1-B visas.)
@@mulemule i didn't know that i genuinely thought everyone who applies for that passport must speak fluently lol 😆😆 It always sounds so difficult and complicated from A to Z but it's not fair it's easier for you guys to move to us , to Europe ☹️😣😞
@@melmess4021 I can absolutely see where one might make that assumption. I, too, was stunned (and appalled) at who was originally seated on the jury after the "voir dire" process. Also, to clarify: A *passport* is an entirely different certifying document with a distinctly different qualifying process than either LPR or a so-called "Green Card" (which is not even actually green). English fluency's even *less* of a prerequisite for a passport. Think of it this way: do you speak fluent Croatian? Probably not. But could you obtain a passport allowing you to *visit* Croatia? Absolutely. (Also, if you think emigrating to Europe's "easier" for Americans, I recommend taking a look at Denmark's restrictions as a good counter opinion.)
The fact that she shows up to court with her hair all done up shows that she's a Narcissist and enjoys all the media attention. I honestly believe she didn't think they would find her guilty.
Yves LaRoux but she's neither in jail or prison so the guilty verdict doesn't matter.
Entitled white woman karen who thought she was above everyone else. She deserves a long sentence. Sociopath!
@@simcastpodvids Well they haven’t sentenced her yet. She will end up in jail…question is for how long.
@@queenoasis Not good enough. She should be in jail right now!
Uhm what? Wouldnt you do your hair if you went to court? I love how her being a crazy narcissict makes people think they're professional profilist 😂 most women would not go to court with their hair messed up
I wonder if they realized she may have killed people due to false diagnosis's.
I could only imagine how hard he would have simped for her given the opportunity if that was enough to convince him how sympathetic she was
"I thought she was genuine"😲. Seriously!? And so did the investors and the employees and the public and everyone else! This woman is a master manipulator and she'll say whatever you want to hear. SMH.
she was a genuine fraud.
She'd make a great news anchor. Intelligent speaker, good at manufacturing sincerity and credibility. She's clearly entitled, wealthy, and heartless. She's even got the pretty face, a nice speaking voice, and doesn't flinch at all when she knows she's lying. None of her claims ever sounded like real science, just another well accessorized scam.
Nice speaking voice??? Like a man!!!
@Welshwazza yes, her face is not pretty. It is mottled with darkness. We are fascinated with her because everyone is always drawn to darkness. Beware, her dark can never change to light.
You forgot to say she has a Fake Thick Voice 😁
If only she was also a pervert, CNN would offer her a show.
@@sarl2121 you got it!
How could he believe and trust her? How could they not find her guilty for putting lives in danger when she knew full well *The machine did not work*
“I thought she was genuine”
*is literally on trial for lying to investors and consumers*
the EH defense team did a great job picking these gullible and not-so-bright jurors. how can you not convict EH of defrauding patients????
Gosh! It's so mind boggling they acquitted her of harming patients and they were also primary victims. That juror also seemed more sympathetic than he should be with a criminal for future's sake.
“Elizabeth Holmes”, a poem -
She’s got a new identity.
The way it was meant to be.
Felon Liz.
That’s who she is.
Sweet reality.
Excellent!!!!
Of course we hear from jurors. They need to start promoting their books.
She's got the same blank stare that Zuckerberg has. 😳
She learned from the "best".
She always knew her machines didn't do everything she promised/claimed, you shouldn't be able to walk away so easily after playing with someone's health
When considering the fact that she was unscrupulus in her pursuit of more funding and defrauding investors, it is easier to see that she did not care about what happened to the patients and saw them as casualties of war, therefore she should also be found guilty of defrauding patients. She basically took a "whatever it takes" approach to her investors regardless of what a faulty product could do to potential patients. Guilty on all counts IMHO. But then, I dont have all the evidence in front of me.
When jurors talk they open up more appeals chances.
Exactly this.
Unfortunately, our culture's now one, giant, confessional turd, endlessly swirling around the bowl of public opinion.
Just cause she believed in her own fantasy, she still jeopardized people’s lives.
Someone should make an Elizabeth Holmes voice app- the funny way to have the news read out
Had a child just to save herself. What a joke
Throw the book at her
confusing statement of the jury you interviewed. she was believable but no?
Maybe the prosecution should have worded the charge “due to gross negligence” and/or intent. Since the jurors couldn’t get past “intent” for the patients.
Also it’s kinda funny how the 4-star general got a 4-star ranking from jury.
The actor is the first juror to speak lol
How can a ceo of a diagnostic co not know the effects of bad diagnostics - fools
As long as you didn't mean to hurt patients, you don't get charged with it? I'm genuinely confused how that works in the court of law. Isn't there a lesser charge for causing patient harm, similar to manslaughter vs. murder?
The main purpose of this trial and found her guilty of some of the counts are to make an example to any similar fraud in the coming future.
Personally, I don't know her in person but after reviewed news articles and video. I found her guilty of majority of the counts.
Holy cow. They got suckered by a pathological liar and they actually deemed her genuine 🤦🏼♀️. I guess we’re lucky she has any guilty judgments.
*Daddy taught her well. Her father was a vice president with Enron! The apple does not fall far from the tree, and One bad Apple spoils the whole bunch*
Does the tech work or not? Simple..if it does, she's a pioneer, if not, she's peddling snake oil..that's my look at it..
Yes, but there is a difference between malpractice/mistakes and fraud. Just because tech doesn’t work it doesn’t mean it’s fraud, it could be genuine mistake. So it’s not as simple as does the tech work or not. You have to prove there was an intent to cause harm. That what is hard.
@@Oktaviii if the technology doesn't work, don't put it out. Holmes railroaded the launch way before it was ready. She knew of the wide range of inconsistencies in the device and insisted it be used on patients anyway. This isn't some cheap stereo system in which buyer beware, you get what you pay for. Rather, it's a medical device. One that should've had FDA approval before any patients were involved. Fraud. Her company Jerry rigged other companies' devices, to short cut their process and at least get some convincing readings out, but used competitors devices incorrectly. Patients thought they'd get the one finger prick, doctors sent patients to Theranos to get cheaper tests, only to end up getting draws multiple times. Waste of time and money, not to mention the health scares that could've resulted in unnecessary procedures and consequencial/irreversible medical decisions.
The science doesn't even close to work. Would need decades more work first. But throw a pretty little liar in, and she'll sell that junk to the ignorant rich today, while making sure it'll never be credible again. More women in STEM fields, sure, but try to screen out the gold diggers first.
@@MinkytheMinkY well said...agreed.
@@MinkytheMinkY I’m not arguing that she is not guilty but I’m saying that determining what is fraud and what is genuine mistake it’s not that simple. One can believe that product is actually working and even FDA can make a mistake by labeling something as safe and later discovering that is not. Its not simply about whether or not product works well, it’s about whether or not it’s malpractice vs international harm. For example if a patient dies on operating table was it a result of surgeons mistake or surgeon’s intent to harm the patient? Those are completely different scenarios and not that easy to distinguish one from the other
Juror: “I thought she was genuine, I trusted her.”
Reality: She is known for manipulating her voice and demeanor during interviews and projecting that demeanor to investors, associates and co-workers.
Bottom-line: They were conned, just like Mattis, et al. She’s good at manipulation and that is f’n scary folks.
😄 True
So, they believed she didn't intend to hurt people. However, she did put money before patients health, knowing that many were relying on her machine to work, when she knew it didn't. So she knew she was hurting people.
Whether she “intended” to or not… she put patients lives in danger!!! Cannot believe she got off on those charges. Also the jury was sympathetic and believed her!?!? WHAT? She literally lied and scammed investigators out of millions of dollars on an idea she clearly knew didn’t work!!!
Her new makeover - younger boyfriend, baby, looser hairstyle, more feminine dress - worked a charm with the older white male jurors! A true con artist.
I wish it was guilty on the patient counts. But not guilty on the investors. cause I like the idea she stiffed this mega wealthy people, who have been stiffing normal people their whole lives.
That's the only real crime in America. You can kill the poor but don't you DARE steal from the rich.
I would like to know why they didn’t think the people she harmed the most, the patients wasn’t that big of deal or a crime.
She needs to be in jail a long time.
So why wasn’t she remanded in custody? Because she’s pregnant? Tough shit! Millions of inmate women had their baby in prison. Wtf?!
OMG, She is indeed one of the greatest CON ARTISTS in history. Even these jurors were conned themselves! LOL🤣😂😂🤣
🤣🤣🤣
How could you not intend to hurt patients when you have demonstrated zero regard for what a doctor may or may not prescribe based on false lab results? That juror has no critical thinking skills.
She didn’t intend to hurt patients but she didn’t care if they were harmed, hurt, or killed.
Can anyone explain to me why so many people believes she’s a genius? She’s a High School graduate. She didn’t invent anything. She became a billionaire through fraudulent and lies about her company. Investors were the sole source of income. Her company didn’t earn anything. However I will say she’s a genius in deception. She was accepted to Stanford(I think that’s the college she attended for a year). So based on that she’s obviously smart. Genius I don’t think so. It’s beyond me how she scammed some of the most powerful and educated investors. It seems to me that before you invest you should research the company, check their books, talk to employees. Make sure your investments has a ROI. Most of her investors know better than to blindly believe what they hear. They were lazy and believed what she told them rather than investigate her company for facts and transparency. Why didn’t they seek medical advice to determine if her claims are even possible. Have an independent company test her technology. I could go on and on. That is a very basic protocol for investors. Their laziness came at a high price and hurt a lot of people.
I’m just so surprised no one figured her out early on. Over the years every time I’d see her talk I always thought there was something wrong. I think at least on some level she is insane.
Yes I agree. I remember her spectacular ascent, and always felt that something was “off.”
🔴 Considering everything she did, she had to be found guilty on ALL counts ❗But is seems that unfortunately her psychopathy affected even the jurors. But having said that, now let's say that AT LEAST she got 4.
Who was holding her hands as she walked in and out?!
Profits over patients again. Guilty on financial fraud but not for putting lives at risk, disgusting
It takes a person with good judgement all of 2 seconds to know she's a con artist.
So we feel bad for super wealthy people who invested in the company with no backing… but the patients weren’t protected…
Pathetic male jurors... patients where endangered an NO ONE will be held accountable.... fools.
Because the little people never count
The jury thought Holmes didn't know her machines didn't work in Walgreens! Wow! Really? When her machines didn't work in Afghanistan or on Medevec helicopters but that then they worked in Walgreens? I understand that she didn't have her devices in the military areas as she described to investors. But, guess what she is a charlatan! Although, I don't get it how if she was ready and willing to bilk small investors out of their life savings why then couldn't jurists figure out that she did find it very okay to sell her snake oil to patients? I know she is a good con artist and they were taken. They are human. Each Jurist if they need to clear their conscience about making a human mistake and voting wrong regarding her knowledge that the machines weren't working need to talk to the employees that kept telling Holmes that the machines didn't work: Tyler Shultz, Erika, etc...and they must know that Ian Gibbons knew the machines did not work and that the heavy load on his conscience contributed to Ian taking his life. I never met Ian...I wish I did. I still think this country needs to memorialize him for trying the best he could to do what was right and fight for others that were being harmed by Elizabeth Ann Holmes. At the end of the day, Holmes 100 percent knew that her machines didn't work and was risking the health and lives of others for her own ego, mostly for the money that supported that ego.
Of course she knew. I personally think the jury stuck too close to the details and didn't join the dots. That is, they went through all facts and evidence meticulously for EACH count (which has its merits of course, because this resulted in 4 Guilty verdicts), but they didn't connect the counts to paint a full picture and particularly, didn't assess the motivations and thoughts of the person behind it. I don't know if thus process was part of jury instructions, or if this was the only way they felt they could handle the mountain of evidence - but I am gobsmacked how anyone with an ounce of EQ can be taken in by Holmes.
@@MsGirlnextdoor123 I've been taken in by women just like her. And, I don't learn because the next one that comes along. I believe. So this world needs to start looking at women as they do men: Willing an Capable of hurting others.
She was CEO of this medical company with no degree whatsoever in the medical field even at the basic level. I’ll bet many thought she was by the way she acted and threw her weight around in the office
How dare she put people in danger she's nothing but a criminal. Shameful gross behavior I hope she gets years behind bars.
“He’s a turkey guy” 😂😂 a lot of detail
The tech didn't work she knew the tech didn't work....SMH
The jury finding her testimony 'credible'?? WTF??? Reality distortion much?!??!
So much for her being the next Steve Jobs. She became the next…
Bernie Madoff. 🤦♂️😆
It is so sad that older males like the ones on her board and unfortunately the two jurors they interviewed were so easily conned by her. I would like to be able to respect men like them but it is like Lizzy Holmes’ professor said when they interviewed her it appears they were thinking with something south of their heads. She didn’t fool her professor for a minute. It didn’t bother any of them at all that she had no medical training whatsoever.
After watching the documentary about her she deserves to go to jail for as long as they can sentence her.
If the jurors believed she (EH) defrauded the investors by flaunting the non-functioning blood technology, with the same logic she is guilty of defrauding the patients by approving the same technology which put several of them in harms way. She knew that Edition machine was not working well giving a lot of false blood results resulting on her pulling out millions of tests. How is she as the CEO not responsible? It baffles me how jurors could not connect the logic or connection.
💯 Absolutely Agree!
Actually, it was the Edison machine. I know, it was the fault of autocorrect.
Wow I can’t believe both those men said they felt she was true in her beliefs - I shouldn’t be surprised though… she’s clearly very good at manipulating older (white) men 🙄 thank goodness they came to the verdict they did
@2:18 the fact that they didnt care if the machine is working or not could end up misdiagnosing a patient resulting to a mistreatment or delay of treatment, its the same as "hurting" a patient .
she still managed to con the jurors :D
Embarrassing!
What I don't understand is (and I've not looked tbh) was there EVER a credible product/patent/prototype/software/hardware combo or even a theoretical proof of function that gave even the slightest notion it could deliver what it promised. As far as I can see, what it said it could do is technologically and biologically impossible by todays knowledge so what was the novel innovative tech. If not, surely the whole thing was a scam from the get go.
That jury was hoodwinked big time. Lucky for her, the jurists were not the brightest bulbs on the tree. You could see that in just these two short interviews.
how is the person who did a deliberate fraud called anywhere near "...genuine..."? that person can only be called deliberate.
Stupid set of jurors the danger to patients charge should have been front and center I bet you if one of their own families was given the false reports the verdict might have been different,
She was/is a liar! Now send her to jail.
Did the jurors fail to comprehend that if she could dope investors she can do that to the general public?>