Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison during appeal of sentence

White collar crime is down ~26% in the last 5 years: https://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/bulletins/white_collar_crim...

Do you think it’s because it’s more of a hassle to go after people who can afford lawyers or because white collar crime is actually down? I think it’s the former.

> This trope that rich people are immune from prison is prevalent on Reddit and other social media every time someone wealthy is arrested for crimes

It's not a trope, it's a pretty logical thing, sadly. Maybe not entirely immune but, when caught, for any crime, rich people can afford expensive lawyers who'll be able to search for any technicality, loophole, problems with the arrest and so on. That's not even considering corruption like getting a friendly judge because your father/uncle or whatever went to college with the right people.

Imagine the exact same crime, let's say selling cocaine. One person grew up in the ghetto and has to use the free public prosecutor. The other is the son of a millionaire. Which one do think will do more prison time?

Of course rich people are going to be made to pay for it if they conned members of the ruling class. Nobody who think rich people tend to escape justice have ever thought otherwise.

This https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_and_sentencing_of_Robert... is what happens when they don't step on the wrong toes.

The belief isn't just that the rich won't go to jail for crimes. Rather, the belief is that the entire system is designed to give the rich incredible leeway not offered to the poor. A basic example would be wage theft, which, despite totaling billions of dollars in theft a year, is only considered a "disorderly person offense." In New Jersey, for instance, theft over $200 is a felony, but this doesn't apply to wage theft, for some reason.

Also, we have a sitting Supreme Court justice who has accepted millions of dollars in "gifts." It doesn't look like anything is going to happen to him. And this type of egregious transgression is just what we know about. It should be clear that Clarence Thomas' behavior is not some crazy outlier. Many politicians seem closer to billionaires than to general members of the public.

Past examples for me. College bribery scandal, Jusse Smollet, are two notable examples recently. The wealthy have the best lawyers who have connections to the judges, clerks, and everyone else in those courts. Indeed it is the wealthy that are able to afford to fight the government on even footing.

Serious question: If it was on the other shoe, would most people have remained on bail all this time to have two children after what Elizabeth Holmes did?

For example, Henry Kissinger (a man I was surprised to learn is still alive) invested ~$6million.

This. If it were just a bunch of average joes that lost their money none of this would have happened. “Buyer beware” is the old adage.

But this is a twofer. It also helps ensures that blood tests stay one-offs and cost top dollar for decades to come. It’s cold fusion all over again. Research in the area has suffered a convenient death blow.

Yeah, iirc her official crime is fraud with respect to investors. There were a lot of people who got bad diagnosis and none of her charges had anything to do with that.

Also that one time their lab got massively contaminated with ebola dna (apparently less bad than it sounds). No charges for creating an unsafe work environment or misleading public health officials on their ability to meaningfully perform ebola tests at (I think it was) airports.

Ian Gibbons unfortunate death. Silence.

No. See Donald Trump, former president. And he was doing this for decades before he became a republican god. See the numerous examples where he managed to avoid paying people for contracting, for example.

Still nursing her stay-out-of-jail baby.

You realize the flee to Mexico story turned out to be fake news and the prosecutors backpedaled?

> While most convicted sex offenders in Florida are sent to state prison, Epstein was instead housed in a private wing of the Palm Beach County Stockade and, according to the sheriff's office, was, after 3+1⁄2 months, allowed to leave the jail on "work release" for up to 12 hours a day, 6 days a week. This contravened the sheriff's own policies requiring a maximum remaining sentence of 10 months and making sex offenders ineligible for the privilege. He was allowed to come and go outside of specified release hours.[99]

> Epstein's cell door was left unlocked, and he had access to the attorney room where a television was installed for him, before he was moved to the Stockade's previously unstaffed infirmary. He worked at the office of a foundation he had created shortly before reporting to jail; he dissolved it after he had served his time. The Sheriff's Office received $128,000 from Epstein's non-profit to pay for the costs of extra services being provided during his work release. His office was monitored by "permit deputies" whose overtime was paid by Epstein. They were required to wear suits, and checked in "welcomed guests" at the "front desk". Later the Sheriff's Office said these guest logs were destroyed per the department's "records retention" rules (although inexplicably, the Stockade visitor logs were not).[117] Epstein was allowed to use his own driver to drive him between jail and his office and other appointments.

How much of that effect could be explained by the ability to afford better legal representation rather than direct preferential treatment?

It’s not about overpromise/underdeliver, byt about an outright fraud - lying to the investors.

Overpromising is something that investors expect, if not even require - startups are all about doing long shot bets, with 5% chance of doing something brilliant and 95% of failing.

Given her age and the possibility (at the time, obviously known now) of a lengthy prison sentence, it was also likely the last chance for her biologically.

I think people should stop assuming malice where other, equally probable, rationales could apply. Let’s give the benefit of the doubt.

A reasonable suggestion given her sociopathic behaviour and I'm guessing she can self-justify the mitigatory timing and the effects on the kids.

Reading Bad Blood, she seems like a sociopath that got those kinds indeed for strategic reasons. Knowing that you go to prison and still getting pregnant is not in the interest of the child.

Even a illiterate/crazy/demented person on the roadside would have told her that she would be 100% convicted.

Having kids well knowing that she would be going to jail is well in the territory of 'Evil'