Investors were swayed by Theranos' promises of groundbreaking technology and comprehensive tests requiring minimal blood, despite inconsistencies and lack of thorough scrutiny.
Investors like Lisa Peterson trusted Theranos based on manipulated documents and endorsements, leading to questions about the legitimacy of the company's claims.
Deep dives
Investing with Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes' Bold Claims
Investors like Bryan Talbert from the Hall Group were drawn to Theranos by the promise of revolutionary technology that required just a drop of blood for comprehensive tests. Talbert believed in Holmes' claims that the technology had advanced significantly, allowing for a wide range of laboratory tests to be conducted. Despite the lack of due diligence, he trusted Theranos' ability to deliver on its promises, unaware of discrepancies like the use of venous draws instead of finger sticks.
Investment Challenges and Strategic Deception
Lisa Peterson of the DeVos family office invested $100 million in Theranos based on endorsements and documents presented by Elizabeth Holmes. Peterson believed in Theranos' capabilities, including its military applications and partnerships with pharmaceutical companies. The use of allegedly doctored documents with logos like Pfizer's raised questions about the legitimacy of the information presented to investors.
Pharmaceutical Endorsement and Due Diligence
Witnesses like Jane Webber from Pfizer testified that Theranos' technology did not meet the company's standards, despite documents with the Pfizer logo implying validation. Webber's due diligence revealed that Theranos' technology was not ready for use and did not align with Pfizer's requirements. The revelation of allegedly doctored reports challenged the credibility of Theranos' claims.
Cross Examination and Legal Implications
During cross-examination, defense attorneys questioned investment decisions and due diligence practices, aiming to challenge the credibility of witnesses like Lisa Peterson. The defense strategy faced objections related to victim blaming and the relevance of due diligence in the context of fraud allegations. The focus on investors' decision-making processes underscored the legal complexities of the case.
This week, we hear from high-profile companies and individuals who invested millions of dollars into Theranos, the prosecution reiterating that these investments were made on the basis of what they say was a pattern of misinformation, exaggeration and outright lies coming from Elizabeth Holmes herself. And we hear from a Pfizer scientist who speaks to the supposedly doctored Pfizer document that Theranos showed investors to help lure them in.