SAN JOSE, California – It took me less than three weeks to focus on a person’s testimony and overarching topics such as financial forecasts, private jets, forged documents and abuse of intimate partners.

On Wednesday lawyers for Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of blood testing startup Theranos, completed her defense in her Fraud process. She was the final witness, and after seven days on the stand, her testimony ended abruptly on a question about justice.

“Do you understand that they were entitled to truthful answers about Theranos’ abilities?” Robert Leach, a US assistant attorney and chief prosecutor, asked Ms. Holmes, referring to the investors and patients of Theranos who are at the center of the fraud allegations If stand.

“Of course,” said Mrs. Holmes.

The end of their defense marked the end of a nearly four-month process that captured the public as a referendum on the startup culture in Silicon Valley. Ms. Holmes, 37, has faced 11 fraud-related allegations made to investors and patients about Theranos, which collapsed in a scandal in 2018.

Next, lawyers on both sides of the case will have to agree on a series of instructions from the jury before delivering their closing arguments, which will begin on December 16. Executives will be charged with fraud.

Ms. Holmes’ testimony made up the bulk of her defense. For seven days, she blamed others for the failure of Theranos and its blood testing technology. She said that her words were misunderstood and that she believed the Theranos devices were working. She said she withheld certain information about Theranos because it was a trade secret. And she focused on Ramesh Balwani, her ex-boyfriend and business partner, who she said was responsible for exaggerated financial projections and problems in Theranos’ laboratory.

Mr. Balwani, known as Sunny who is about two decades older than her, was also controlling and abusivesaid Mrs. Holmes. He prescribed her schedule, diet, self-expression and the people she could see, she said. He also forced her to have sex with him, she said.

When asked how this had affected her work at Theranos, Ms. Holmes said it was difficult to tell where his influence began and where it ended. In the legal acts submitted before the start of the process, Mr Balwani emphatically denied the abuse allegations.

But Mrs. Holmes also admitted that she had made mistakes. She added logos of pharmaceutical companies to the validation reports she sent out to investors, which led her to believe that the pharmaceutical companies had endorsed Theranos’ technology. She said she regretted how she handled a Wall Street Journal exposé of private detectives and legal attacks on former employees who spoke to the journalist. And she positively admitted that false information could be spread Title article Fortune about you.

Ms. Holmes concluded with a speech about her intentions to introduce Theranos to investors, patients and the press.

“I wanted to convey the effect,” she said. “I wanted to talk about what this company could do in a year, five years, ten years from now. They weren’t interested in today or tomorrow or next month, they were interested in what changes we could make. “

All of this should support the main defense argument, as set out in the September opening statements. Mrs. Holmes, her lawyers said, made mistakes. But their mistakes weren’t a crime. She was naive and ambitious, they argued, but she never meant to deceive.

“Theranos did not see failure as a crime, they saw it as part of the road to success,” said Lance Wade, one of Ms. Holmes’ attorneys, in his opening address.

During cross-examination, the prosecutors tried to dismantle Ms. Holmes’ apologies. They found that Theranos had shared many other trade secrets with its partners who signed non-disclosure agreements. He pointed out that Ms. Holmes allowed false and misleading information about Theranos to be spread to investors and patients.

At the beginning of the trial, Ms. Holmes’ attorneys attempted to drill holes and cause confusion over the facts of the case during the testimony of 29 witnesses named by prosecutors. They attacked the credibility of investors and tried to show that they did should have done better Before investing, do research on Theranos to understand the risks and details of its business. And they tried to argue that patients who said they had received worrying blood test results from Theranos were not qualified to interpret them.

Source link

Leave a Reply