Almost everyone who has ever heard of theranos has heard about the new trial that is going on right now. It’s a pretty big deal, and many are wondering whether it will end up with Elizabeth Holmes in jail, or if she will be able to go on with her life. Here are the details of the new trial, and some of the arguments that have been made so far.
Dr. Rosendorff’s testimony
During the trial of Elizabeth Holmes, the CEO of Theranos, Rosendorff’s testimony was central to the prosecution’s case. But the legal team for the convicted fraudster has struggled to undermine the testimony. They’ve filed for a new trial and have tried to discredit the testimonies of other witnesses. The lawyers for the convicted fraudster have argued that federal prosecutors may have distorted the evidence.
The Rosendorff testimony is not likely to win the convicted fraudster a new trial. But the defense team is taking advantage of Rosendorff’s post-trial action and misgivings about his testimonies. The legal team’s attempt to undermine Rosendorff’s testimony is intended to show that he is unreliable.
Rosendorff said he was appalled by the failures of Theranos blood-testing technology. He also said he felt remorse for Holmes’ unborn child. During the trial, Rosendorff testified that he believed Holmes deserved to be convicted. He also testified that he was a “moral obligation” to warn the public about the company’s testing technology.
Uninvited visit by theranos elizabeth holmes
During the recent trial of Silicon Valley entrepreneur Elizabeth Holmes, her lawyers argued a bit about whether the government had hid any evidence in the case of her alleged frauds. They also made a pitch for a new trial, which US District Judge Edward Davila rebuffed.
There are a number of motions in Holmes’ courtroom, largely focusing on a dispute over whether the government withheld any evidence in her case. The lawyers have been relying on former Theranos lab director Adam Rosendorff’s post-trial action. This includes a series of articles in the Wall Street Journal and Business Week that laid out serious flaws in the company’s blood testing tests.
The fabled Theranos test reportedly showed promise in the early days, but the company was eventually shuttered in October. The company had a slew of high profile execs, including Holmes, Sunny Balwani and her partner William “Billy” Evans.
The fabled Theranos reportedly featured a series of tests that promised hundreds of diseases could be scanned with a few drops of blood. However, a series of articles in the Wall Street journal in 2015 exposed serious flaws in the company’s testing methods.
Sunny Balwani’s trial appealed based on theranos elizabeth holmes’ conviction
Almost thirteen years after the scandal surrounding theranos began, the trial of Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani is now over. The former chief operating officer of Theranos was convicted of 12 counts of fraud against investors and patients. He was sentenced to nearly 13 years in prison and three years of probation.
Balwani’s attorneys argued that Holmes was a victim of Balwani’s actions and that Holmes was not a criminal. But they also pointed a finger at Holmes, arguing that she was swept up in her dreams and did not have the ability to rationally evaluate the company’s claims.
Balwani’s lawyers said that the government cheated the jury by cherry-picking information to create a more favorable outcome for Holmes. They claimed that Holmes had a close relationship with Balwani, who influenced Holmes’ decisions. They also said that Holmes was manipulated by Balwani, who later took on a role as president of the company.
Sunny Balwani’s sentence could be taken into custody
Earlier this year, Sunny Balwani was convicted of defrauding investors at Theranos, the company founded by Elizabeth Holmes. A jury found him guilty on all 12 fraud-related charges. He was also convicted of two counts of conspiracy.
Prosecutors wanted a 15-year sentence for Balwani, and asked Judge Edward Davila to impose that sentence. But the federal prosecutor who handled the case said that a harsher sentence was appropriate. He stated that Balwani was “power-hungry” and had a “ruthless” approach.
Lawyers for Balwani told the judge that the prosecution’s portrayal of the relationship with Holmes was inaccurate. They argued that even if Balwani did commit a wire fraud against a potential investor, that did not prove a conspiracy. They disputed the government’s assertion that he intentionally did not tell Walgreens about different machines.
Attorneys for Balwani argued that he was never a fame seeker, and that he never manipulated Holmes. They also questioned the government’s loss calculation. They pointed out that Balwani donated millions of dollars of his own money to charitable causes before Theranos.
