Previously on the drop out Elizabeth homes conclude her testimony and the defence rested its case. I think, given the ever Instead, they have. This has gone as well as it could for the defense so at the end, will even wonder be feeling sympathetic enough towards her that they cannot converter, they won't convict. I think that's entirely possible this week. Both sides make their final push with the eight men and for women of the jury without a doubt, closing arguments are the most important time in a trial, its b lawyers last chance to get there The story before the jury before they go back into that deliberation. Room

will present the most compelling case. The fate of Elizabeth homes will soon be decided from ABC Audio. This is the drawback Elizabeth homes on trial, I'm Rebecca Jarvis episode. Eighteen closing arguments more than three months. Thirty, two witnesses and three juror dismissals after the criminal trial of Elizabeth homes began attorneys for the project, you and defence had the chance to make one final appeal December 16th at one hundred and thirty. A dot m journalists and curious observers started lining up in the cold and rain outside the San Jose Courthouse to reserve a seed inside we cut up the night before doktor an Cobb, sale or retired biotech

executive who's been coming to the trial since the start. What do you expect from the closing arguments? I do think the prosecution he's gonna just really hit home a wise and how those led to the investments and then I think be defence is going to really push on that Elizabeth did not intend if the people perceive those as lies, she did not intend those and that other people or feeding her information, and they were responsible for it information. When we spoke she whispered hearing mentally and physically for the undertaking and bring in a kind of had, along with the ring code and the umbrella will socks and will pass well. I hope you get a good But- and I hope that in the main room and you're not having to battle it out, It would be a long frigid wait for every one outside, including doctor, cops ill, who, by the way, shown up at five.

Fifty five, a m but still got. stuck in the overflow rail link. With arrived around eight a m with our partner, Billy Evans and her mother by her side, but there was who face in the entourage, Elizabeth Father, Christian homes had been for, in from attending up until this point as a possible witness on the defensive, lest, with testimony concluded he now free to join once inside the crowd shuffled to their seats in the overflow rule There were some whispers about a new observer, Tyler Schulz, the ground son of Fairness Board member in former Secretary of State George Shawls, whose way oh blowing in many ways is reason we're all here now to your knowledge did miss homes know that farragos could not. do all those tests she yeah

Tyler was on the prosecutions. Witness list so is also now free to attend. He sat quietly since the proceedings as they began on the occurred in the homes matter, said judged Arbela just after nine, a M prosecutes, Jeffrey Shank rose and addressed the jury, Elizabeth HOMES a choice to make in two thousand nine twenty ten and then again and twenty thirteen. He said she could watch there are no slowly fail or she could make a different decision. we now know through the evidence that she made a different decision. She chose fraud over business failure. She chose to be dishonest with her investors and with patients. That choice was not only callous, it was criminal fraud. Over failure the phrase that would come to define Shanks presentation, Shank told the jury. An honest pitch

I mentioned the company only had a handful of tests that the technology Wasn't validated by pharmaceutical company is wrong military or medevac helicopters that it wasn't deployed in the battlefield, Afghanistan or the Middle EAST, Jane said he is closing. Argument would be broken into four parts. One a summer of the twenty nine witnesses. The prosecution called to arrive, of the crimes. Elizabeth was charged with committing three the individual elements of those crimes that the government had to prove beyond reasonable doubt and for the evidence itself. to address topic number one shank began by projecting large photos of the government's twenty nine witnesses summarizing each of their testimonies White collar defensive, Ernie, Caroline police. He says this was away to coherently, put the puzzle pieces together. The whole point of closing arguments as to tie everything together

the wrapping up with a little bow and their serving it on the platter to the jurors and saying this is why you should return a verdict of guilty than each piece of this evidence into a certain element of the offence, one one shank went through the lab directors, the patients, the doctors, the farm employees and all investors, who'd wired, money to Aronnax when Shank got to pastor, Brian Tolbert. He played Israel it investor call with Elizabeth for the court, with you all one eye the company. We knew that it would take us a long time to be able to establish an infrastructure that could do any lack of his heart international from my group devil, several years ago, and we realized tat, we created restructuring that could in fact make it possible to

get rid of thanks to the boy drawn from the arm entirely. Shank pointed out that Torbert and the other investors who communicated with Elizabeth left interact. Since, with her with the understanding that therein This technology could run any text. It wasn't, Justin aspirational claim the way a list with presented it. It was a done deal. Shame then reminded jurors about the last government. Witness journalist robbed, Your parliament part of the scheme the government alleges occurred here with me, Holmes to use the media to do some of the work for her said shank she made falsely men to the media and that when those All statements appeared in articles. She, then those articles to investors. He said shank played for the court, one of illicit recorded conversations with parliament. It starts off with parlor requesting a site visit,

interested in here. If it would be small. The Phoenix lab visit again Phoenix LAB is not yet operational, although sampled are still being processed here in Palo, oh, but then Elizabeth, habits telling parliament he'd essentially already seen the lab when he saw. but there were no such devices stacked up with the lab looks like member. You thought that bank of devices that refer to one or two in the lab appear Why can we literally there were on third of a stack of shell, so the lab is basically probably four of those stack with devices on both sides,

though you, if you'd like to see it- and I was trying to remember whether I walk you through it or not, it was downstairs stairs you're welcome to come back out here in fear, but I basically You feel when the tape stopped playing chess explained to the jury that these were false statements from Elizabeth. She communicating here's. What the lab looks like it looks like a bunch. Our devices when, in fact the actual Phoenix LAB contained Only third party devices with that shank moved on to the second part of his four topics: the charges against Elizabeth for each. He gave a brief description of what the government needed to show Miss homes is charged with committing to crimes. He explained the first crime is the crime of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. The second crime is the crime of wire fraud.

Frank told the jury to think about the charges. From the perspective of the victims, the investors and patients who testified shanks said the government had to prove that there was an agreement between two or more persons to commit wire fraud and that a list, It became a member of the conspiracy knowing of at least one of its objects and intending to help accomplish it. What is the agreement between homes and by shank asked rhetorically well. For the, vast or side is to get money from investors through fraud through fraud statements, shank room Did the jury that, while Elizabeth and Sunny had different roles at the company Elizabeth was always play. information and had ultimate control over their house. Shank listed off examples to back this up. Showing the jury attacks were sunny, tells Elizabeth. He dislikes the direction she's taken with the pr and legal work. She has control in those areas. Shag emphasised shank quoted safe.

Ratio, Steve Bird, who said Elizabeth owned a room and did most the talking in meetings with investors, something other executives, if I too, as well while the defence had painted a list, those hands off when it came to the lab, Shank told the jury. That email evidence suggested otherwise, Elizabeth dictated results should be reported and what to say to doctors shank move to the second element of the conspiracy charge, Elizabeth knowledge of its objective and in TAT Shank, said Elizabeth Objective, to secure money. She knew she needed at when Denise Yam shared the company is poor. Financials Elizabeth knew that but he was on shaky footing. Then she made false state and to investors. She knew those statements were false. Shank pointed out, and yet she Munich, hated them knowingly to investors anyway, Shank moved on the conspiracy to defraud patients, charge Miss Home

His role in the patient fraud is to recruit patients through false statements, false statement, that were made in the press falsely it's that were made on the website about things like the accuracy, the reliability of the blood testing, shake explained sank again pointed to text messages and email evidence in which Elizabeth and sunny talk about the lab being a disaster proving Elizabeth was well informed. Elizabeth knew about these problems. intentionally, communicated the opposite to patients, Shank Roma did the jury that before the website went, live attorneys. Total is to remove certain misleading phrases phrases she continued to pass. Did the pace Debts and investors anyway, next up shank, address the six wire fraud accounts, the bulk of the end, nightmare Shank showed a slide of each investor next to their name and count. Alan eyes and men. Chris Lucas Bryant, Oliver Ryan Grossman, LISA Peterson and Dan mostly Shank reminded

sure, as they wouldn't see the names on the verdict form and encourage them. To take careful note, Shank went through the different categories I'll statements. Elizabeth repeatedly made to these investors, which you ve heard repeatedly throughout this trial, played another clip from the investor call with Tauber, where Elizabeth talks about their noses lucrative farmer contracts, retail infrastructure foundation for being able to really to be a lot of the pharmaceutical programme that we did and allowed to build sprawled casual regions. Since we got our theory round into doubt, who did this was a lie explained shank. There are no wasn't? Making money from pharmaceutical companies to survive? Shank played in. Their portion of the investor call in which he said Elizabeth lied about their noses relationship with the d o d, hurry

the big deal her. I can tell you that, actually up all the areas in which we work is there one thing. I want to work in the Middle EAST and the degree of to day technology like this and put it in Plain quickly back as a potential I already chink reminded the jury, Elizabeth Herself testing I that there wasn't work in the Middle EAST or Afghanistan. She's make false statement. After false statement, Shank said: Shanklin played another clip. Elizabeth Interview with journalist, Roger Parliament, emphasising

the jury. How evasive and misleading Elizabeth was about her technology. Can you tell me again when you do perform Verona punctures? Why is that? At the moment there is a variety of reasons. I think the biggest reason is there were scaling and were supplementing Rina puncture with our micro samples from capillary ample their fingers deck to handle that volume and what would be the situation where you would have a bottomless at Walgreens use reasonably azure here so so out, Walgreens adding the word even before the big three than is just Edward, bringing up more and more tough and building out inventorying

happy in our lab will use Vienna Puncture in addition to the micro samples just to handle volume time of sample. There were processing, Shank, told the jury that has the tape regressed, parlor cap, pressing Elizabeth trying to get at why Aaron House was still doing bein a puncture at Walgreens. Is it because you can't do the test you dont yet have that test? but instead of admitting that Elizabeth told parliament, it was a way to manage the volume of tests attorney. Caroline policing things, these two, could actually be as useful to the defence as they are for the prosecution, because both ways right so she talks in these very broad strokes. She talks really really. In retrospect, what is extreme calculated tenses and doesn't actually ever answer questions directly and with the parlor tapes. If you action,

look at the words that she's using she never act he says straight on that this is happening that we're doing this I moved on to the next element of wire fraud charges materiality the idea that these kinds of false men's about military relationships, blood volume, farm validation, accuracy revenue would cause an invest, you're too and best these false ments made by Elisabeth mattered. Why? Because as the investors all testified, they wouldn't. invested and therein, it was had they known the truth about these particular issues. Chagrin worse than Elizabeth, had the intend to defraud, because she made the weeks to show investors these false claims. In order to raise money, she kept false, clean on the website to attract customers, Shanklin minded jurors about the altar documents and attacked Elizabeth claim. She wasn't intending to deceive anyone, look at what

use Miss homes as making up these documents. She it's in an email to Walgreens attached. Please find three endeavour and in due diligence reports on their no systems. These reports are from Glaxosmithkline Pfizer ensuring plough, after their own technical validation experience with their no systems in the field. She was its Walgreens to conclude that they are independent. Due diligence reports said shake that the farmer companies prepared the report's after their own technical validation. Shank turned the Joe radio article from the Wall Street Journal published when the Walgreens deal went live. She no the content of the article. She knows there are statements in the article and, as you saw a moment ago, it get sent to shareholders, intent prosecutor shake then focus the jury's attention on the wire fraught claims against patients, recall the faulty each eye.

Bp essay and h CD tests, the scheme visa people patients explained shank, involve both electronic wires to purchase advertisements to induce or encourage patients to use the service and so the use of that their nose website or articles to endure the patient to go to the fair knows patient service center. They used electronic wires to send the lab results from their lab to the doctors office, knowing that those lab results were likely to contain inaccurate or unreliable results, shanks onto show again how Elizabeth knew that information presented publicly to patience was false. He read aloud heck sunny, wrote to her. We can move, get our lab and everything and people will talk about our finger. Stick without us talking about it, then she great attacks from Elizabeth. I think we should. show them. The first add that's going to run in Arizona it mention nanometers or finger stick just less blood, which I will make a big deal

being butterfly and smaller needles. Frank also reminded the jury that Elisabeth knew about problems before going live in Walgreens and two had anyway. Shank pointed out that window. arose endorse. As lab director raised issues about the patient ass. The response was to get rid of him. Shhh read the jury, a message sent by sunny at the time we need respond to him now and cut him Monday. They're going to get ready of the lab director who actually raises questions who has concerns shank emphasise and who did they replace him with? They replied and with Mister Bell, want dermatologist who works five hours. Course of seven months and Doktor Sawyer, who works even less shank, reminded the jury up the defences biggest theme. Business failure is not fraud. If Miss Holmes, had just allowed their nose to fail, said shank. If He had not chosen to go down the path of fraud. Then I think that statement would apply.

But what happened here is when faced with the potential of business failure. Miss homes chose a different path and that's where the fraud comes in, Shank went on to address the continued focus by that offence on Elizabeth Youth defence. Also, I think we'd like to freeze time, have you think of homes, as the nineteen year old College drop out that started. There knows the entire time she was at their nose, but the truth is by I'm investors who invested in twenty thirteen or twenty fourteen were interacting with her. She was nearly thirty and had been ceo for a decade. At that point they were not in acting with someone who had inexperience running her company. He said there are no, didn't need more experience to avoid fraud. Here he continued they didn't need one more m d or one more phd to avoid the fraud. It was

question about experience. They needed a ceo and a ceo who interacted with people honestly who told them the truth about what their nose could and what it couldn't do. Shank said change also challenged another argument from the defences opening statement that the government, looking at the case through a dirty lands that just wait and use the evidence in the case and you'll see that a lot of just innocent of ads. You reminded the jury the witnesses they heard from. Were former employees Elizabeth hired investors, Elizabeth recruited patients, Elizabeth advertise too partners like well greens and save way. Elizabeth negotiated with you are being asked to look at the facts of this case through the government's eyes said: Shank, derby ass to hear and evaluate the testimony of witnesses that, at least One point in time the defendant herself select. It then

shank addressed Elizabeth own testimony. The judge will, did you jury instructions and they'll cover things like bias and credibility of witnesses, and you conclude that there is no witness the testified in this case. That has me, or bias more interest in the outcome of the proceedings. Then the defendant herself That means that you should look sceptically had anything that she testified about. That was self serving he play now that Elizabeth Attorney cabin Downy showed emails, indicating Elisabeth received positive information from scientists and therefore anything should communicate. It wasn't meant to defraud the problem. Is that's inconsistent with the facts and the evidence that you ve seen said shake also seen email after email example after example, where she's told negative things, poor developments, unfortunate things that are happening at their nose and Things are not being communicated to investors.

deciding what's the kind of information to be communicated, and what is it than framed in another way, if there was no intent here. If they were just hold whatever she knew, you would expect there be a random distribution of some statement, saying positive things that she heard and some statement saying, negative things that she heard, but when the witnesses the victim investors testified. You heard favourable and false over and over a fake, The whole thing about their knows that wasn't true. There is other word for that shanks said and that's intent. She's choosing, which are the kind of facts to communicate and which are the kind of facts that should not be communicated. Shank read a portion of it its testimony about the light bulb going off in her head after problems with the lab and sunny emerged following the cms on it. There is a fundamental problem with testimony. Shank explained that test money is not true

I've seen example, after example, of Miss homes being told by Mr Bowe Wadi an by her own brother, about problems in the lab. shank then went on to address Elizabeth most explosive testimony. The purported abuse suffered at the hands of her former boyfriend and Seo Sunnyvale Ahwahnee claims that outside of the court money, has firmly denied shank address seeing the jury was adamant. You do not need to decide whether that abuse happened in order to reach a verdict. The case he said is about false statements made to investors and false statements made to patients Do not need to decide the question about whether the abuse happened. Here's Caroline Policy- I thought they did what they had to do with this to addressing those allegations. The prosecution told the jury. Both things can be true at the same time you can

simultaneously acknowledge tat. She may have been in an abuse, are really kinship, but that doesn't necessarily negate hers. made of mind or negates any of the alligator is that the governments putting forth on in. indictment in so basis. Typically addressed that fact for the jurors, because they essentially gave them permission. You know that the government is saying in order to come to a guilty verdict here, you can still what she saying at face value and believe that what she was saying about the relationship is true, then thank began to build two. His grand finale this story, we have therefore knows is in some ways a tragedy. He said what happened to the investors and to the patients should not have happened. They we have been engaged with honestly it's also the story of individuals acting with remarkable integrity. Individuals like Erica Chung, who said she was starstruck when she first interviewed with Miss homes, but eventually

and to see the problems with the technology and quit when her cons parents, fell on deaf ears. Individuals likes you make a gun, dickhead, car and doctors. dwarf, who also concerns yet were similarly ignored, shank continued Fraud is sort of like a head start on the truth, for a law long time, homes in Bologna knew the truth. They knew what they are. Can do and what it couldn't do, and the people that they interact and the investors in the patient's did not end. took advantage of that sort of gap at information and for that they were able to commit fraud and because of that You should find Elizabeth homes guilty of the charged offences, but You shouldn't find her guilty because of my words, you should find her guilty of her words, Shank, concluded by pointing to a text exchange between Elizabeth and sunny on December twenty seventh, twenty fourteen

Zimbabwe any are texting each other saying that this year, twenty fifteen will be our year that this year we will execute the problem is that by December twenty seven, twenty fourteen every and Esther that you'd heard from had already invested. Producers testing patients blood through Walgreens for more than a year and those the visuals patient investors they all thought they were engaging with the company that had been executing. That didn't need to hope that they would finally execute, and because of that there really is only one verdict supported by the evidence and that's guilty on all counts. Turning Caroline police. He thought this conclusion was a missed opportunity on the part of the government. Shanks final words vow really flat to me this last

piece of evidence that is closing on. You would think you would want to be a sort of a crescendo piece of evidence like a great sort of closing that tidying up in a bow and just serve it up on a platter toujours. It just was not that they are texting each other. This is the year that we're gonna execute on the vision for a company, and that is supposed to be. Aha moment, that is the sort of nail in the coffin on the prosecutions case, Gimme a break if anything, it should have been something like we did it, we got them, we trick them. You know we got investors who invested in our company because they bought into this false narrative that we were that we were tying them out. No, I didn't say that It showed to people that were still extremely devoted to this company. Still, really believing that they could deliver on these lofty promises, which is what the defences saying from the beginning. I really didn't think that this was a good closing

evidence to leave the jury. What fate this is bride milky. I host ABC Daily NEWS. Podcast start here, the drop out we'll be back in a minute, but first I want to invite you to start your day with us every morning. On start here, we die deep into the big, news stories with some of the best journalists in the world. It smart its relevant and maybe most importantly, for you, it's quick again that start here, the daily podcast from ABC News available wherever you listen defence attorney Kevin Downy started his closing argument, which spanned over two days with a familiar theme. Elizabeth homes was building a business and not a criminal enterprise. down. He told the jury that, while the government might have them believe that their nose was built by lies by swindling by half truths by misrepresentations, then in fact Baroness was built

and its business was conducted by a large group of people who shared many characteristics. This group down, he said, was brought They were intelligent, they were creative, they believe, in the mission. They were had to invent and then to make a product they could be used to make blood testing services more convenient, more affordable, cheaper and, at the end of the day, make people healthier He told the jury that by the time he had gone through all the evidence. They see that the full picture reveal something very different from what the government has been presenting to you for three months and indeed fiddle ass, three hours We began by reminding the jury that Elizabeth was not charged with defrauding the farmer. Companies she's charged with making balls, representations to subsequent investors about whether their nose had partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and weather was pharmaceutical companies validated their noses technology. Downy explained D.

We then pulled up a slide from their noses presentation to Walgreens and twenty ten there presentation was that there are no systems had been comprehensively validated over. The course of the last seven years by ten of the fifteen largest pharmaceutical companies said Daddy down. He went on. the evidence shows that in the years between two thousand five and twenty ten therein had a number of successful partnerships with pharmaceutical companies and that individuals within their nose, believe that talked about it representative to each other and talked about externally, but of course there was that altered Pfizer document issue, Dounia addressed it the contract Queen Pfizer, and there are no specified that there are no should prepare the report and it should submit the report at the end of the programme for an assessment by Pfizer said Downy remind the jury that Pfizer never communicated and negative view with their nose Danny went on Miss home

admitted to you that she added the logos and did it without thinking. There was anything wrong with it and why would they be her state of mind. Downy asked he then pulled up. exhibit showing that Elizabeth had put investors in touch with Pfizer and that a list with had sent the infamous document back to Pfizer logos at all, Holmes has no intent to deceive people or hide things that are going on in those relationships. Contrary to the government's assertions set, dowdy downward you're, the other doctored farmer reports to sharing plan when Glaxosmithkline had they responded with any concern. No downy emphasised down went on to tell the jury that had it not been for the defense, they would have never heard the many many pharmaceutical projects that their nose had and completed successfully we emphasised here. he's telling the jury, the full story attorney.

Caroline police eat that these points went a long way for the defense. The biggest bombshell that we talked about certainly was this doctoring of the Pfizer documents. But then I thought Defense was able to show that she actually then resents the Pfizer document. Another pharmaceutical company doc with both fairness and the pharmaceutical companies logos that she had put on them. She sent them back, the actual company maiden ban. I wash, and you know if, if this was really such a untoward thing too, you will then why didn't Pfizer say something about it at the time. I thought that was down. He said what the prosecution had done was a pattern, the government is showing an event, looks bad, but at the end of the day, when all the evidence blows together, it isn't so bad downy then told the jury, the critical quest they needed to answer, was Elizabeth Intent

What's she understood in believed why she did what she did if you a reasonable doubt as to whether Miss homes committed any element of the offence. You should find her not guilty down. He said. And what does reasonable doubt mean? Downy asked rhetorically turning the jury's. hedge into a visual aid, it was the image of a staircase, the first step, said no evidence that led up to scintilla of evidence, a little farther up, the staircase was probable cause and then finally reasonable doubt downwards the jury. They had to climb that entire stair case before finding Elizabeth HOMES guilty attorney. Caroline policing, but this was a useful device, even though got instincts play a big part in trials when jurors get back there and they have to fill out the jury form. It is it's almost scientific in terms of each every element must be met beyond reasonable doubt. Then you heard the defence. Just

be labour, this point of just how high a burden of proof the government has to the sad, side with respect to getting a guilty verdict. In this case, I think the defence very good job of explaining this idea to jurors that it's not you. don't you think she did or you she probably did at? Or maybe you know your beer? It is more likely than not that she that she's guilty, not that's not the standard in the criminal justice system and has to be. beyond reasonable doubt, that's an extremely high burden for the government downy, will the jury. There were five categories of evidence that would present a clear picture than Elizabeth did not intend to defraud these worthless its relationships with the FDA feedback from employees, feedback from outsiders, Elizabeth repeated willingness to expose their noses technology to outside review and the

actions Elizabeth had taken after the CMS report. First, Elizabeth relationship with the FDA Miss homes worked proactively between Twenty thirteen and twenty fifteen to get their noses system for point o approved by the FDA down. He said he emphasised. The FDA had in fact approved one their nose test. The herpes test, down. He said Elizabeth had disclosed what was going on in connection with their nose business in great detail to the FDA down then turned to the inner workings of their house. I think you know and Miss homes testify to this that she will Eve, starting as early as twenty ten that their nose was going to be capable of putting in place. four point, o technology that would be capable of performing any blood test. Elisabeth received regular updates about the technology. He reiterated that's funny. mantle and central to her thinking when she goes out and makes public statements down

you're the jury's attention to doktor Ian gibbets and the report he delivered to Elizabeth Twenty ten about their noses. Four point: o technology which, as you will recall, came up a bunch and Elizabeth Zone testimony in this document, Doktor gibbons, who was leading essays at the time reports that the were pointed system will be capable of performing any measurement required and distributed test setting down. He then moved the Feedback Elizabeth was receiving at the time from outsiders. But she really respects he reinforced. For example, Elizabeth enter and board. Member Channing Robertson had told investor I engrossment of p affirm that there was nothing the technology couldn't do down said there are NOS, had received positive feedback from GS, Kay the male clinic and medical experts downy the Johns Hopkins document, which will recall, have the disclaimer at the bottom stating it was not a validation of their nose technology, but downy room

the jury that Johns Hopkins had found. The technology was novel and sound that it could replace Central LAB and that it didn't have any major weaknesses. What does it say? about Miss homes. Downy asked rhetorically. She wasn't afraid to him. This technology validated and what happened and when issues did come to Elizabeth attention. Downhill to the cms. Ought it one of the first things Miss Homestead was to ask a large group of national scientists to come to their analyse and evaluate the technology. The data, the technical Gee itself said: Downy. Its to see how someone acting with bad and tat would undertake those steps in response to the type of criticism that she was suffering down. He said and what and when it came to voiding the questionable test results. Downy said Elizabeth, turned on a dime at the end of the day, down. He said to the jury. The question

really asking yourself is what was Miss homes intent was she trying to defraud people? Did cheaper even good faith in her technology. Did she respond to events in a way that suggest she knew she had been caught? I would say it Ladies and gentlemen, Downy went on that this effort It's taken an aggregate says to you the following. She believed the chief invented a very valid form of technology that she was submitting to the FDA for approval to take to the market. It says that she believed that other outside the company share that view, and she had no fear of showing that technology to people outside the company and its to you that as soon as someone said, no, there are problems here, Korea, She was to invite people and to look for those problems and root. Those problems out are those actions of someone who had been engaged in a conspiracy to defraud people down, he asked if the government fails to prove that war

element it beyond reasonable doubt, then, with respect to the cap that are in your verdict, born you should return a verdict of not guilty. Downy told the jury. Downy also addressed the testimony of many government witnesses that they were unaware. Your thoroughness was relying on modified third party machines for many tests. This was no secret, said downy. The FDA was told in the fall of when he thirteen that Venus testing was being performed. He said the fact that their No, I was using Venus. Testing was disclosed on its website. As you see here, he said pointing the gym his attention to an exhibit- it's not credible, that investors were unaware down. Told the jury. He wanted to tell them the story of what actually happened at their house. He recounted a list It's early journey. There was a lot of progress in the early years and then their nose head extraordinary breakthrough in twenty ten were signed.

Jason engineers in a large number began to believe that they had invented the technology that would realise their noses goal. Excitement circulating in the company. He said people believe they'd invent the methodology to do any blood test. That is the moment at which the government says a criminal conspiracy began within their knows said, downy down. He then took Jerry through their noses relationship with Walgreens, taking a step back to mind them. That Walgreens was a giant publicly traded coming with lots of stores and retail operations all over the country, whereas therein, This was a six year old company with a twenty six year old, ceo and no public presence or retail experience. But the government says there are no came to negotiate and during the course of those negotiations, defrauded Walgreens said Downy Downy drew the jury. his attention to what he said were the two major issues the government raised with the negotiations. First, the pharmacy.

oh validation, the claims about ten of the fifteen, largest pharmaceutical companies, evidence is consistent with it being accurate, said: downy the governments other issue was the claimed. Their nose could run comprehensive blood tests across a wide range of technologies. Said daddy. You know what that statement came from its from the discussions with doktor gibbets and others in the early part of twenty ten said downy Downy reminded the jury that the former Walgreens CFO testified. He understood the technology was going to develop into further generations and as the partnership with Walgreens progressed down, reminded the jury. That Elizabeth was relying on a large number of very highly qualified scientists to lead that are, and D effort specifically Doktor Daniel Young, their nose VP and led scientist. He appears something like two hundred exhibits during the course of the case said downy. He was effectively the chief technology offers

or if there are no stirring this period, but doktor, young, wasn't called testify. Downy reminded the jury and because of that, we know what his testimony would have been with regard to the technology, but you Nobody said in real time said downy and you What miss homes testified to as her understanding of those capacities. Downy then went on to frame their noses use of modified third party devices as an ingenious invention. solution to dealing with large sample volumes. It is also an invention. That was an incredibly important trade secret, said downy, and because of that Downy argued Elizabeth was guided by experts to fiercely protect this trade secret, something she did disclose in board meetings and to the FDA and CMS Downy said now. The proposal of the government is that even though this was a trade secret use,

found some way to disclose at tier investors, but the it's just at the time that the invest There were very well aware that there are NOS had trade secrets of which they didn't have knowledge. As for the board members, if Elizabeth was a criminal, he asked. Would she have assembled this incredibly. Illustrious group of people who had expired it's over time and the technology industry in the medical industry and government in retail many many different areas, the touched on their noses operation and in which she could get candid and direct feedback if she were criminal. That seems to me, ladies and gentlemen, said downy to be very very unlikely that's an additional judgment of her intent that you can consider as part of your deliberations That's where downy left it for day, one of his closing argument when defence attorney downy

things up the following morning. You reminded the jury that Elizabeth was interested in long term. Investors and often would speak about the future of the company in five or ten years. That's important and that's the disconnect he said with what the government would have you believe. Downy explained to the jury. When Elizabeth was talk, to investors and the public. She wasn't sealing the number of tests that we're done on older their nose devices? She was painting a picture of the future. only addressed the six investors who testified. He pointed out that this was. It tiny sample there were acts the two hundred seventy five people or entities that had invested and therein else he told the jury he reference their stock purchase agreements, investors. were told. This was a speculative investment, and these supposed to be sophisticated investors. With decades of experience now, people lost money said Downy I dont mince words about that.

Holmes, certainly did not intend for people to lose money. That's a bad omen in a failure on her part, but that's not the shoot that were concerned within this trial, he said the issue you were concerned with, is: did she intentionally make misrepresentations two people for the purpose of inducing them to invest in her company the Avenue says, fairly clear that she did not said downy when investors were investing in twenty thirteen or twenty fourteen, why did they invest? He asked The reason that they invested was that they knew that Walgreens had agreed to put their nose technology in their stores eventually and to operate. There are no service sectors. That judgment was all they needed to know, because that meant that a big national company had evaluated their nose the decision to become a partner with arrogance and bringing its technology to the public market. That's a big deal, that's a

bigger deal than the number of particular tasks at any given moment said Downy downy, then. asked the taped invest, recall the main focus of the government's presentation of evidence. Here is the statement that MS homes made during that tape recording about their noses relationship with the military and what the use of her nose. Devices was in connection with men of acts years. Some of that tape again to refresh your memory. Technology like this and put in place better back potential. I already downy have this Ized Elizabeth was using the word potential as in the future, down he then went on to list some of the work their nose had in fact done with the military they had contracts with come. He said, and special operations command now was and I was doing any work towards this goal, or was this as I think the gun

it suggests just a fantasy of Miss homes down he asked well, the truth is, her testimony during the case farragos, was doing a lot of work towards this goal said Downy care line policies as this was very effective in addressing the government's claims, the matter back, the deity that type of and down. He said: look the government got up here and basically try to sell you a story that was really not fully accurate. They would have you believe that this idea of fairness energy being used in Afghanistan are being deployed on matter back and in helicopters and and and things like that, but that was a complete fantasy made up by Elisabeth homes. Well, if it weren't for us up here and showing you guys these exhibits of the actual content that there are no has had in the actual work that it was doing with these entities? You would have just thought that she had made

up out of thin air. Will that's not exactly the case. Downy also addressed the parallel tapes, suggesting that Elizabeth had disclose their nose was using modified third party devices when she told powerless, lab in Arizona would be a moderate complexity lab, do you have a medium complexity, Levin Scottsdale luxury? It's called a moderate complexity lad. How can the difference is to run laboratory, develop tough you need to be a high complexity, lab according to downy. This indicated the lab was using commercial devices and that disclosure tells MR peril of everything that he needs to know said Daddy he then turned to address? The patient claims. Ask yourself the question. He said Was Miss homes intent with respect to what was going on in the lab was in good faith? Did she believed

The test that were being offered were accurate and reliable. If she did, why did she believe it was a familiar theme that we ve heard before that Elizabeth believe things were ok, because employees Like lab director, Doktor Adam rose Indoor told her, they were, after all, Doktor Rosen Dwarf had said in his own testimony. He never offered a test. He thought was inaccurate and unreliable, so downy too to the jury did is homes no in running their nose. baroness was not able to consistently provide accurate and reliable results down. He said what they'd heard from these few patients was purely anecdotal. These were mere three among a pool of millions of tests downeys and actually a list it was receiving a lot of positive patient feedback, which informed her view. of what they are. No services were doing for people's health down closed. His argument, focusing on the government's main theme that, when a lizard

It was out of time and out of money. She does. to lie, there's no but it's at all, none at all said downy links their noses efforts to enter into partnerships with Walgreens and safe way to any desperation for money. Any concern that money he sat down, said, in fact, the companies own record showed the opposite that their nose, out to raise money and twenty ten after it had achieved a technological breakthrough and then, in TWAIN thirteen after it was moving forward with Walgreens. You know Miss homes did in her life down. He said you know. That she left school. She gave up a college education that people would give their right arm, for she gave up her youth. She gave up her friends, She gave up her close relationship with their family. Why? Because you believe she was building a technology that would change the world. That's our story said downy. He contra did that with the government story, the beginning and

any ten, every day, every day, from twenty ten to twenty. Sixteen, she knew she was committing a crime. She was robbed investors and that in twenty thirteen she can robbing patience. You don't to know what an assay is. As you don't need to know. What Clia is? He told the jury? You know from your own spirits and from your own common sense how to evaluate people's intent. And you know that at the first sign of trouble, crooks cash out criminals cover up and run let's leave are fleeing ship. She didn't do it of those not it was phrase by the way that drew a little attention outside the courthouse, Dounia fumble, the bed rats flee sinking ship, they don't leave a fleeing shut down, when on did she cover up? What did she tell doktor does turn Iraq, every rock under which the government says was hidden a thousand crimes? Did she cash out? You know that already

sell a single share of stock. Did she leave in the face of that criticism. No, she stayed. Why because she believed in this technology. She stayed the whole time and she went down with that ship when it went down, ladies and gentlemen, Downy closed. That is who this woman is, and I am asking you to quit her on all counts in the indictment. and you don't need more for me to know what her intent was, notably absent from his closing any reference to the alleged abuse Elizabeth suffered at the hands of her former boyfriend and c o o sunny bout, Ani attorney care line police. He thinks this omission may have been a smart calculation, and yet I think they don't want, this credibility now with the jurors they dont want oversaw their hand, so they ve laid out argument: they ve elicited the testimony. They have that in the background that now is

the jurors mines in terms of contacts to realising what was going on, at least in Elisabeth homes as personal life, which clearly spelled out answer her professional life. They have the context of what was happening in the background They don't need to now kid it over the head with a hammer and run the risk of losing credibility, in the eyes of the jurors- because, let's be honest, it's a pretty far fetched argument to make that she should be absolved any criminal liability at all. Based on this abuse of relationship, the two don't match up, and I think that, just purely by dint of habit sort of existing on the record. In the background they ve gotten the benefit of whatever that testimony is going to do and now they're moving forward with, though the legal arguments they still.

maintain their credibility with the jurors with the debate Wrapped the prosecution has. The final word, with the rebuttal prosecutor, Jeffrey Shank, pass Baton to John Bastard, who began by laying out the story of two different versions of the company called therein house. The first version a revolutionary company that had created a device that could run any blood test from a tiny fingers stick sample had been found. Aided by major farmer companies and was being used to save soldiers lives on the battlefield. Was never real it. four existed, it exists it only in the words of the defendant, Miss hopes and her co conspirators sunny by Ahwahnee Fosdick said It existed in the written materials that she and her co conspirator provided to investors and to others outside the company and it exists, in the minds of the people who believed her. Those in

asteroids impatience at the heart of this trial, the right your version, Boston, continued, was dramatically different from the road you picture than Elizabeth was painting for others. Employees, have worked hard to make the technology work, but the disease that begged therein owes wasn't a lack of effort. It was a lack of honesty and it wasn't at the bottom. Of the ground level of the company, it was at the top, as evidence has shown a plastic said. So what was the darker truth that therein House Basta cast for one thing, the evidence, The trial has amply demonstrated that there were very serious problems with their noses technology problems of quality control, We heard about many many times, problems that for employees like Erika, Chung and Doktor Adam Rosen door had raised that Elizabeth had been com, neatly aware of next month stakes. What was true at their nose tore the product

our challenge, defence attorney Downeys assertion that therein owes had a rich ongoing relationship with pharmaceutical companies and was generating a significant amount of revenue from those relationships that simply wasn't true, said Boston, For starters, the undead bearded evidence shows that there are no collected, no revenue from pharmaceutical companies. After two thousand nine said boss, Dick Fosdick brought up noses financial issues there, one the two million dollar a week burn rate the fact they were like than two months from running out of money and shutting their doors in September, twenty thirteen, when they pursuing their launch with Walgreens and aggressively pursuing investment from investors. You're not required to fine motor plastic reminded the jury, but that is absolutely part of the motive it this case by

dick once again emphasised that their nose devices were categorically not being actively used by the military and rebutted Downeys references to the limited engagements that the company had with the military, the Miller, reclaims Elisabeth made to investors were simply not true, boss, Dick said, and if invest had known those facts. They never would Britain checks that therein house, if walk had known those facts. They wouldn't have partnered with their in ocean, agreed to put their noses testing services and Walgreens stores and of pain. had known those facts they never would have to. did their nose to tell them what was happening with their health? In other words, Boston concluded those facts, the truth, we're fatal that there House and Miss homes knew that bus it went on to try to dismantle some of the specific themes that Elizabeth Attorneys had offered in her defence telling the jury he was going to walk through white. None of them gets in the way of a conviction on all counts. In this case, both parties

rebuffs said. Miss homes worked hard that she will There are now is to succeed. She wanted her company to be successful, but while the defence have you believe that was a reason to doubt. Miss homes, intent to defraud Fosdick, said, on the contrary, Elizabeth committed these crimes, precisely because she was desperate for the company to succeed. Fosdick pointed to defence. Turning down his assertion that the failure of a business does not equal a fraud. Again, there is no dispute. her bossed accepted, but he added that's not nature of the allegation, in this case, by convicting his homes by finding that all the elements are met in this case, you're not punishing the defendant being ambitious and failing we admire, people who set ambitious goals and set out to achieve them, no boss, continued, you are to look at the fact that Miss homes with used to accept failure and turn to breaking the law. Instead, as for Elizabeth Age, you should

be distracted by that plastic said, although the defence high it's. The age miss homes was when she founded the company. It's important to remember that the person on trial is thirty. Seven years old today, in twenty thirteen and twenty four teen when she was deciding to offer flawed blood tests to the public. She was twenty nine thirty in twenty times When the fraud on investors began, she was twenty six that is certainly old enough to know the difference between right and wrong. It's old enough. no, the difference between honesty and dishonesty said, Boston, adding, remember could Chung joined their knows just out of college. Ask could Chung. How young is too young to know that offering inaccurate blood tests is a bad thing. Plastic said the next offence, the ambassador took up blaming. Others first list its board of directors, its impact the blame: the Board of directors for what happened here. Bossed accept mainly because the

board was not given the information that it needed to help the company navigate the problems that it was facing. They weren't told, for example, about the companies use of third party analyzes, something General James, Madison testify to general has testified that, had he known it would have leaped out at me, because my whole effort at Saint COM had been to try to get it into theatre because it was different, and it could do that south of this one small machine, Boston than us the board was essentially window dressing. They were not there their contributions to the steering of the company and the decision making of the management. Instead, they were there to be impressed and bolster the reputation of the company next boss focused on the scientists and Engineers Elizabeth Fosdick said claims to have relied on advice from Dan Young, but the evidence showed critically that he was unaware of the claims that she was making about. Their noses superior performance are supposedly superior performance based action,

the jury? Some examples of this bastard also reminded the court, many scientists were well aware of the problems with the companies technology resigned, including lab director, Doktor Adam rose indoor. If Rosen What was really in charge of everything in the lab? Why did he quit out of concern for the way that the technology was performing plastic asked. Why did he quit and protests The practice is in that there are no lab if it was within his power to change things. Next Boston dress the lawyers, the defensive reference, the guidance given Elizabeth, but boss said on many occasions. The jury had seen evidence Elisabeth over road. That guidance. Then there were the investors. The defence had continuously pointed out their lack of due diligence, their lack of optimism, but what does law, sound bad asked, boss. Dick jury structure, twenty six as precisely an alleged

victims. Negligence is not a defence to wire fry. In fact, a scheme to divide it is still a scheme to defraud, even if it would only and stare someone who is less careful and they should be, and while these may have risk investments. It's no excuse for giving false information. Boston also into the defences continued references to next generation devices that therein ups, they saw to blur the lines between the devices nose was using to conduct its patient testing and the new generation devices that were in development, said mastic. The statements Holmes made were never about current their nose technology, never about devices that were currently being used for patient testing. The defences asking you to believe that all of the false claims miss homes made about the technology, we're about some fictitious future device. Bostic said statements in investor documents were in the present tense. Boston emphasise those invest

Your presentations would have needed to be completely rewritten in order to be honest and lighted. The defendants theory about these next generation devices boss, emphasize that this pointed squarely at Elizabeth guilt. This argue that MS homes was actually talking about a future device and not current technology is actually is never get admission by the defended. It me means that Miss homes was intentionally representing as a present accomplishment, something that has not happened yet that she knew that little it's as presenting it as if it excuses miss homes as criminal conduct. But in fact this just a description of how the fraud actually worked. Then boss address the doctored. Farmer documents, the defence, it argued Elizabeth sent some of these back to farm companies with no repercussions, but Boston pointed out there wrong thing that happened there is that the How goes where used to deceive a third party weather

the potential investor and their knows whether it was Walgreens, a potential business partner? That's where those d payments were used as tools? That's the wrongful conduct that you should focus on as fir tree, secrets said Bob: Stick. The defence would like you to believe that in every case. Every time information was withheld from a victim. It was simply a good faith effort to protect the companies trade secrets. that defence doesn't hold water said bosniak, particularly when it comes to modifications that were made to third party devices. The defence wants a view, those as trade secrets bud. Caustic asserted that's nonsense. There is no argument. There can be no argument that the use of non modified third party devices was a trade secret that something that any lab could do. It was one more instance of Elizabeth, creating a false impression, which was her goal, argued boss, DEC

then boss, Dick addressed the defences claims that Elizabeth didn't sell her stock. It is necessary basket, pointed out to find that Miss homes. actually made a financial profit from this fraud or that it was successful in order to convey That is not an element that the government has to prove. Nonetheless, there were other benefits flowing to miss homes other than money. She. substantial salary. She also benefited from attention, the accolades, the fame and the prominence that being the ceo of this successful company, broader and there is another reason why she didn't cash out and that will leads to her ultimate vision and the level of well then success that she wanted to achieve in November of twenty thirteen sunny tax Miss homes. Let's build the true American Empire, a monopoly. Our obligation to USA and Miss home, responds. That's what we're doing. It's not disputed Miss homes, apparently

evidently was not in this simply to get money, she wanted to build the true american Empire and the success of the CAP but he turned out to be the motive for the crime that she committed. Finally, Fosdick addressed the topic the defence had decided not to touch in its closing argument, Sonny, Hawaii and the alleged to be, see inflicted on Elizabeth abuse. He can weekly denies. I wonder if if you feel like that, testimony makes your job more difficult or more complicated. It's difficult for to sit and listen to someone talk about something painful are hurtful that they ve been through. Its now shoulda have a reaction to hearing some one talk about something like that might be wondering how Miss homes is. Claims of abuse affects your analysis of the fraud in this case or whether it the analysis at all, but dick emphasised. This is a critical thing, understand. You do not need to

reach a conclusion regarding what happened with Miss homes and Mister Bell was any to render your verdict. In this case, it's important note that there's no evidence here connecting those allegations of abuse with the actual charged conduct and crucially said boss DEC, even Elizabeth herself, admitted on the stand that sunny did not forced her to make any statements to investors to journalists. He did not controlled her interactions with Walgreens and Safeway executives, or with that their nose board that Mr Baltic said: will leave you wondering why Miss homes testified about those allegations in the absence of any evidence linking that experience to the charge conduct you it put it out of your mind, said boss, DEC He also reminded the jurors that sympathy has no part in your deliberations. According to the jury instructions, what did matter? What the jury, should focus on according to Boston was Alyssa.

its behaviour before outsiders started asking questions its. I was telling what a person does when nobody is watching Boston said he encouraged. The hurry to consider the intelligent, thoughtful and well spoken person. They saw the stand, intelligent people, understand the difference between what is true and what is not between What is happening today and what might happen in the future. Thoughtful people like Miss homes, think carefully before they say something and well spoken. People like Miss homes have no trouble communicating exactly what they mean to communicate. Based on that. You know that, when Miss homes again and again, intentionally told people that their nose could do something that it could not that that was on purpose and that are intent. was to deceive and to cheat this is it he's about lies and half truths said boss. Stick, it is a case about borrowed credibility. He said

Miss homes borrowed the credibility of pharmaceutical companies of Walgreens and the illustrious members of the board of the press. Attaching herself to these individuals and organisations. She bolstered therein his own credibility. And by exaggerating those contexts she caused I too believe that therein owes must have the legitimacy of these other entities. Over the years of their noses operations. Boston said Miss home, Had multiple chances to do the right thing, so many of the fork in the road she chose the dishonest path. He said stead of telling the truth time time again she consistently put reputation of the company over what the law requires and what patients and investors were entitled to Boston, Klute at his closing remarks by reminding the jury that Elizabeth repeatedly sat on the stand that she will

She'd handled certain issues differently How should that affect your thinking asked bosniak? Well, you should realize that someone in Miss homes position naturally might feel some regret about choices that she made it. Be strange if she didn't given what has resulted from those choices, but you keep in mind that, regardless of how she feels today about her past choices, its those too says themselves that you need to focus on in determining whether she committed a crime back then, because Miss homes made the choice to defraud investors and patience, and because she conspired with sunny by wanting to carry out those schemes, use, return: a verdict of guilty on all counts. That's only verdict, supported by the evidence and with that over three Months of arguments and testimony came to a very highly anticipated and attorney.

Airline police. He thinks the prosecution made a much stronger showing in their rebuttal, but will it be enough? They definitely a better job on rebuttal than they did in their beginning closing argument, and perhaps it was a strict, He jerk move on their part to save all the big guns for the rebuttal, because that's obviously the last thing that the jury are going to have in their minds. They have to go to a very high level of look. She knows it. Where's between right and wrong. She knows the difference between truths and untruths, and so you know the defence can split fears about whether the tents of what she was too get out was sort of in ie operational or whether she was talking about right at this moment. Let's be honest, you know with what we ve been indeed many many witnesses here that got the distinct impression that this will happen

being in this moment in time at their knows that there are no technology at tat. Very moment was capable of performing any tacit. A traditional blood analyzing company could do and that it had come acts concurrently, contemporaneously with the Department of Defense, that it was doing all these things in real time and clearly, there's there's something to be said for that. I mean there's a reason that this case was indicted. Right there is lot of evidence that she misled investors, doctors and patients about this technology. My only concern with the government's case is whether or not they can really get over the hurdle of the burden of beyond reasonable doubt. Clearly there, something there. She clearly miss let people the question is: can nay makes sort of a bullet proof argument that is going to fly with jurists

will soon know what the jury believes at four Thirty p m. On Friday December, seventeenth, the case officially handed to them. Liberation commenced at eight thirty, a M yesterday December twentieth. Will this be a quick call? Police eggs it'll, come sooner than later definitely think we'll get a verdict by Christmas. No jure is going to want to draw this out past the holiday it's. Why sort of you often see verdicts on a Friday. There is nothing that moves jury to a consensus to unanimity. Then an upcoming holiday, and so I think that they are going to do their job diligently, but also with the understanding that they're going to come to

our conclusion before the how and when it happens, deal now because we'll be back with our final episode, the verdict make sure your subscribed, see you don't miss it and a final. No before we go, we have some exciting news. While the trial is about to end, there is more of the drop out story on the way coming to Hulu March Third, twenty twenty two, a limited scripted series called dropout based on first season of this podcast. It starts a man deciphered as Elizabeth HOMES intervene Andrews as Sunnyvale Bonnie, thanks for listening, we'll be back soon.

we hope the Elizabeth HOMES and sunny about wanting did not respond or decline. To comment for this part cast some light years, including port depositions, were edited for clarity and time. The drop out Elizabeth homes on trial is written in reported by Victoria Thomson tailored done and me Victoria's. The executive producer Taylor and I are producers for a busy audio Susie Louis producer and Madeline Wood and Marvel Malarkey are associate producers deah, thin and miles Helen. Our court producers for ABC Business Unit are associate, producer is Victor or donors, and our production assistant is lean. Win mixing in scoring is by Susie Loo and Evan Viola Evan also compose the music for the drop out. Our work is by Teddy blanks at chips, and why and separate constitute for a busy audio Liz. Alessi is executive producer special thanks to Josh Cohen Elizabeth Rousseau, even Rosenberg, Erika, room and station issue.

This is what being alive is I this is ABC News life worth around, squeezing it isn't shelter on urban delivery, rather not afraid to go there. So my question, Mr President, what are you so afraid of waking? News live offence streaming street to you any time run right near his is ABC. News lie thanks for streaming with us.