At 32, Holmes was dubbed
“Youngest Self-Made Female Billionaire” by Forbes. His revolutionary biotech startup, Theranos, had a market value of over $9 billion, and was by all accounts the elusive Silicon Valley unicorn: a company promising to democratize the health care system through proprietary blood diagnostics technology. Holmes claimed the ability to perform a variety of blood tests with the pinprick of a finger with a few drops of blood, and claimed she could do it better, faster, and cheaper than a traditional blood test. Except she can’t.
until the publication of the Wall Street Journal
sharp investigation In 2015, in the company’s practices and integrity of Holmes, it was too late. Theranos was already shipping blood tests to third-party vendors using traditional blood diagnostic analysis because its own technology was not up to snuff. In 2017, Theranoso
settled a civil suit with Walgreens for an undisclosed amount and
negotiated with investors In exchange for the issuance of potential legal claims against the company. As of 2018, I
wrote That I wouldn’t be surprised if the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California has an open criminal investigation against Holmes. Turns out it did.
Holmes is now facing
12 fraud charges And he is accused of engaging in a criminal conspiracy with former Theranos chief operating officer and chairman Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani. Holmes and Balwani allegedly lied about the capabilities of Theranos’ proprietary technology, the extent of commercial and commercial relationships, its access to the Defense Department, and the company’s financial position. Both have pleaded not guilty and are being tried separately.
During the pre-trial litigation, glimpses of a potentially explosive defense began to take shape. Holmes’ team noted in the court filing that they can use:
specialist in clinical psychology Whose work focuses on trauma and victimization as well as post-traumatic stress disorder.
Furthermore, he alleged that Balwani was more than just Theranos’ COO and Holmes’ co-defendant. Holmes’ lawyers alleged that Holmes and Balwani had been romantically engaged for more than a decade, which the lawyers described as
“an abusive-partner relationship,” In which Balwani exerted psychological and emotional control over Holmes. is strong
“Strictly Denied” claims.
Importantly, Holmes’ lawyers said intimate partner abuse affects the “agency” and “state of mind” of its victims—which are important elements of any criminal case because the government’s burden is not only to prove that Holmes made materially false statements to investors, but she knew the representations were false, and that she intended to defraud. In layman’s terms, the defense appears to be making an argument that the effects of Holmes’s alleged abusive relationship with Balwani were in fact directly directly related to his beliefs and why. In other words, in this argument, “Holmes is not guilty.”
The court filing also noted that the defense team seeks for the jury to attempt to dispel common misconceptions about abusive relationships: they would argue that Elizabeth Holmes may have been a highly successful businesswoman, while her alleged appearance was not may also suffer internally from an abusive relationship.
the prosecution has to
walk a fine line If in fact Holmes’ defense ranges between acknowledging that Holmes experienced abuse at the hands of the bully or risk being perceived as “victim-blaming” or “victim embarrassment”, as well as arguing that Hue that the relationship still didn’t affect her ability to understand the obvious lies they say she was making about the company to investors, doctors, and patients.
Will the jury members find Holmes self-declared
“mental disease or defect” Defense reliable? Or will they feel that Holmes is taking advantage of a cultural moment and using it to his advantage? The answer will likely depend on the specific evidence presented by the defense, much of which is still unknown. I
Asked before this
column Whether the #MeToo movement will meaningfully infiltrate our criminal justice system. Holmes’ team is attempting to defend this as well, showing that there is no doubt about it.
.
