Elizabeth Holmes, CEO of Theranos, finally charged

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They met/started dating in 2018. Theranos went tits-up in 2017. Although that has interesting implications for her trial. So...

And his parents were not a fan -

Evans' parents are reportedly "flabbergasted" at their son's decision to marry Holmes, the Post reports. A former colleague of Evans' said: “It’s kind of like Billy is her shiny new toy. She’s super enthusiastic about being with him."

This is her with her brother at a Obama event in 2015.

She’s horrible but her brother is FINE! Anything wrong with him?

He was the product management director at Theranos

Ouch. Well...maybe he landed on his feet.

I am sure he did.

In 2011, Holmes hired her younger brother, Christian, to work at Theranos, although he didn't have a medical or science background. Christian Holmes spent his early days at Theranos reading about sports online and recruiting his Duke University fraternity brothers to join the company.

[Anonymous]

According to Forbes magazine, she got into Stanford through "the back door" because she wasn't even a good student. White privilege will get you everywhere in life it seems.....until the fraud is revealed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They met/started dating in 2018. Theranos went tits-up in 2017. Although that has interesting implications for her trial. So...

And his parents were not a fan -

Evans' parents are reportedly "flabbergasted" at their son's decision to marry Holmes, the Post reports. A former colleague of Evans' said: “It’s kind of like Billy is her shiny new toy. She’s super enthusiastic about being with him."

This is her with her brother at a Obama event in 2015.

She’s horrible but her brother is FINE! Anything wrong with him?

He was the product management director at Theranos

Ouch. Well...maybe he landed on his feet.

I am sure he did.

In 2011, Holmes hired her younger brother, Christian, to work at Theranos, although he didn't have a medical or science background. Christian Holmes spent his early days at Theranos reading about sports online and recruiting his Duke University fraternity brothers to join the company.

LMAO like father like daughter like son

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They met/started dating in 2018. Theranos went tits-up in 2017. Although that has interesting implications for her trial. So...

And his parents were not a fan -

Evans' parents are reportedly "flabbergasted" at their son's decision to marry Holmes, the Post reports. A former colleague of Evans' said: “It’s kind of like Billy is her shiny new toy. She’s super enthusiastic about being with him."

This is her with her brother at a Obama event in 2015.

She’s horrible but her brother is FINE! Anything wrong with him?

He was the product management director at Theranos

Ouch. Well...maybe he landed on his feet.

I am sure he did.

In 2011, Holmes hired her younger brother, Christian, to work at Theranos, although he didn't have a medical or science background. Christian Holmes spent his early days at Theranos reading about sports online and recruiting his Duke University fraternity brothers to join the company.

My novelist friends could not write a better two sentences painting a dude as barf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to Forbes magazine, she got into Stanford through "the back door" because she wasn't even a good student. White privilege will get you everywhere in life it seems.....until the fraud is revealed.

WTH does that mean? She's a legacy and they paid for a new library?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

Ask him why so many people were fooled - including the actual scientists she had working for her company. Or did they just not care?

She had people working for her who said it wouldn't work. But you couldn't tell her anything because she knew more than the experts.

It wasn't just that you couldn't tell her anything. She had security who would go after/sue/threaten/intimidate employees. It got to a point that they were spying on their own employees. She knew it all was a lie, she just didn't want it to get out.

I'm sure prosecutors have a lot of evidence of this. It screams consciousness of guilt.

This case should be a slam dunk, but the fact that she hoodwinked all those muckety-muck old men worries me. I hope the judge is a woman, especially when it comes to sentencing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to Forbes magazine, she got into Stanford through "the back door" because she wasn't even a good student. White privilege will get you everywhere in life it seems.....until the fraud is revealed.

WTH does that mean? She's a legacy and they paid for a new library?

I checked out her wiki to see if it had anything about the brother. She attended Stanford’s summer Mandarin program.

And one of the people she rooked was Betsy DeVos!

[Anonymous]

Here we go

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

Ask him why so many people were fooled - including the actual scientists she had working for her company. Or did they just not care?

She had people working for her who said it wouldn't work. But you couldn't tell her anything because she knew more than the experts.

It wasn't just that you couldn't tell her anything. She had security who would go after/sue/threaten/intimidate employees. It got to a point that they were spying on their own employees. She knew it all was a lie, she just didn't want it to get out.

I'm sure prosecutors have a lot of evidence of this. It screams consciousness of guilt.

This case should be a slam dunk, but the fact that she hoodwinked all those muckety-muck old men worries me. I hope the judge is a woman, especially when it comes to sentencing.

It would be nice but we all know people like her don’t answer for criminal conduct and won’t be held accountable. I’ll eat my shoe if she receives anything more than a performative fine. He legal team will turn this into a mental health issue and then a feminist issue. Guarantee it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

Ask him why so many people were fooled - including the actual scientists she had working for her company. Or did they just not care?

She had people working for her who said it wouldn't work. But you couldn't tell her anything because she knew more than the experts.

It wasn't just that you couldn't tell her anything. She had security who would go after/sue/threaten/intimidate employees. It got to a point that they were spying on their own employees. She knew it all was a lie, she just didn't want it to get out.

I'm sure prosecutors have a lot of evidence of this. It screams consciousness of guilt.

This case should be a slam dunk, but the fact that she hoodwinked all those muckety-muck old men worries me. I hope the judge is a woman, especially when it comes to sentencing.

It would be nice but we all know people like her don’t answer for criminal conduct and won’t be held accountable. I’ll eat my shoe if she receives anything more than a performative fine. He legal team will turn this into a mental health issue and then a feminist issue. Guarantee it.

Be prepared to eat your shoe.

I remember people insisted Lori Loughlin wouldn’t go to prison either. Now look who has a felony record.

[Anonymous]

She seems like she is "on the spectrum" as we say in education. I am a special education teacher.
The interview with a friend from middle school in teh Dropout made me think about girls on the autism spectrum.

It could explain (but not excuse) her hyper focus, lack of awareness of others, overly secure sense of herself, obsession with Steve Jobs, odd eye contact, weird voice, etc.

Also, the voice thing (using a deeper voice) is something that some young women do to sound more authoritative.

I am in no way excusing her actions, just trying to make sense of this odd person. She deserves to go to jail and to be held accountable for all her crimes.

[Anonymous]

The courts need to stop letting her use her female privilege to get off the hook for so long.

[Anonymous]

Lawyers, is the prosecution presenting a strong enough case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember the original New Yorker article (when she was a star) and when I read about the WSJ reporter investigation, but I', listening to The Dropout for the first time.

I did not know that people had received incorrect test results--I thought they were always just having other labs do the Walgreen tests.

Why did Walgreens not get suspicious when they had to use phlebotomists?

Given the company's paranoia + hype, when they bought test equipment from other vendors, how did they keep that secret?

Check out the original thread on her - hilarious in retrospect: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/405456.page

Someone on DCUM called her out as a fraud in that thread - in 2014! It’s on page 4.

The hilarious thing is someone on DCUM called them out for correctly assessing that this is the most fraudelent company in history

I came in to say this.... The whole platform is suspect and they haven't released any data to be publically scrutinized. They are running LDTs which do not have to go through FDA clearance. You can have all the patents you want but let's see if the have a viable product.

The idea that one can do 30 assays from 25 uL of whole blood is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

+100 it is moments like these that keep me coming back to DCUM. Some of you all really are smart and educated.

Kudos to that poster and shame on the many of us who didn't heed the warning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember the original New Yorker article (when she was a star) and when I read about the WSJ reporter investigation, but I', listening to The Dropout for the first time.

I did not know that people had received incorrect test results--I thought they were always just having other labs do the Walgreen tests.

Why did Walgreens not get suspicious when they had to use phlebotomists?

Given the company's paranoia + hype, when they bought test equipment from other vendors, how did they keep that secret?

Check out the original thread on her - hilarious in retrospect: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/405456.page

Someone on DCUM called her out as a fraud in that thread - in 2014! It’s on page 4.

The hilarious thing is someone on DCUM called them out for correctly assessing that this is the most fraudelent company in history

I came in to say this.... The whole platform is suspect and they haven't released any data to be publically scrutinized. They are running LDTs which do not have to go through FDA clearance. You can have all the patents you want but let's see if the have a viable product.

The idea that one can do 30 assays from 25 uL of whole blood is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

+100 it is moments like these that keep me coming back to DCUM. Some of you all really are smart and educated.

Particularly cringey

"Do something you love, and the money follows."

I guess it should be "Lie, lie, and lie again, and the money might follow. But then, so might the FB"I"