Trial of ex-biotech billionaire: preliminary decision in the Elizabeth Holmes case?

The Theranos founder may have been heavily incriminated this week in the fraud trial against ex-biotech billionaire Elizabeth Holmes. The cross-examination by the prosecutor was a turning point, according to experts.

As on almost every day of the trial, the first spectators queue up in front of the courthouse in San José, the self-proclaimed capital of Silicon Valley, a good 80 kilometers south of San Francisco, starting at 4 a.m. Then the same crowd, for almost three months: cameras, flashlights and jostling journalists.

Elizabeth Holmes enters the courthouse. The 37-year-old never comes alone. She is usually accompanied by her husband, who is eight years her junior, the millionaire hotel heir Billy Evans, or her mother.

Possible turning point

Not only has the trial tightened this week, but Holmes’ statements could also mark a turning point to their own detriment. Because for the first time, the former model founder had to face the prosecution’s questions.

Reporter Rebecca Jarvis has followed the process from the start and produces the podcast “The Drop Out”.

So far, Holmes has hardly spoken out. Now you could see a very emotional defendant. When she was questioned, she said a few things that were not previously known. For example, that she had been raped at Stanford University and that was one of the reasons why she dropped out of college after just one year in order to found her start-up Theranos.

In her interview, Holmes also made a statement that was expected before the proceedings began – that her long-term business partner and partner Ramesh Balwani had forced her to have sex several times and often verbally humiliated her.

Podcaster Jarvis says: “He specified her daily routine. Even what she should eat. Balwani has already clearly rejected these allegations. The jury will have to grapple with these statements as well as with the question of whether there was intent behind their actions.”

Was Holmes acting on purpose?

This is the most important question that the court must clarify with the jury: Has Holmes deliberately lied to investors and business partners such as the drugstore chain Walgreens because it knew that the blood test devices developed by their company gave almost no reliable results?

So far, Holmes’ defense has tried to shift the blame on other Theranos employees – the boss of their laboratory, their ex-boyfriend or the marketing department. But she probably made a serious mistake this week when she was cross-examined by Attorney Robert Leach. Leach asked her: Wasn’t the responsibility yours? Holmes replied, “Yes, I felt that.” Podcaster Jarvis says:

The defense now has to come up with a strong counter-argument. The prosecutor was able to produce a great deal of incriminating evidence. This week’s cross-examination, in particular, clearly charged Holmes with allegations of fraud. ”

How long the trial against Holmes will last cannot be foreseen at the moment. The 37-year-old faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted.