[nickpinkston]

If you steal more than $5K three times in California, you will get 25 years in prison [1], and while I think that's disgusting and detestable, I don't want any elites getting special treatment either, so as to force change in those sentencing guidelines.

[1] https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html

[gumby]

> I don't want any elites getting special treatment either...

These days I normally roll my eyes and stop reading when I encounter someone saying "the elites" but in this case it is 100% appropriate: she was a member of a wealthy elite, and both deliberately and casually used her connections from the get go.

[explaininjs]

Did you mean "causally"? Not sure the degree of formality is relevant.

[gumby]

No, (and I'm not sure that "causally" would even result in a comprehensible sentence).

Her deliberate use was exploiting her very close childhood friendship with Tim Draper's kids to get Draper to fund her and use his network to find other investors and to get the message out. Another was her using her network to get a number of distracting and bizarre board members (ex generals and the like), especially when Vally VCs (other than Draper) refused to give the company the time of day.

The casual way I noticed was how she just slipped into a milieu of Ted talks, various "though leader" pieces, and circulated at Davos and wherever. No gawky fish-out-of-water period.

This is quite different from the typical nerd "has to get used to things" situation and gave her tremendous credibility with the rubes outside the valley.

I would drive or bike past their office on Page Mill and for a long time had no idea what they did, despite having been in the life sciences myself at the time. They were weirdly physically in Silicon Valley but simultaneously not part of it.

[explaininjs]

“She both deliberately and causally used her connections” would mean she concisely chose to use the connections and the use of those connections was a necessary condition of whatever transpired.

Seems to me to be a much stronger statement than “she used her connections and didn’t seem to care too much about doing so”.

Regarding her seeming effortless transition into the public spotlight, I’d imagine it’s learned from a young age as an “elite”. Fun fact, her great* grandfather made the yeast company you probably use.

[pianoben]

As an idiom "casually used her connections" can mean "without due consideration" or "without compunction". It implies that "using her connections" was an easy and simple choice for her, as opposed to one in which she wrestled with the moral dimension.

[diydsp]

Three strikes can be triggered with much less, even petty theft can trigger it. In this example, the defendant received 25 years in prison for his third crime of stealing a pair of socks[0]

"Specifically, the Three Strikes law made it possible for a repeat offender to receive a prison sentence of 25 years to life for a nonserious or nonviolent felony (for example, petty theft with a prior)"[1]

[0] https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/cruel-an...

[1] https://lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm

[nickpinkston]

Disgusting... thanks for sharing.

[dragonwriter]

The federal sentencing guidelines have nothing to do with California state criminal law. Of course, if an act is both a federal and state crime, you can be prosecuted for each.

In fact, if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state as well as the federal government if it is also a federal crime. This rarely happens even where theoretically possible, but it can (its much more common for other jurisdictions to prosecute if you are acquitted in one but the act could be prosecuted in another as well.)

[ashwagary]

>if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state

For the California three strikes law, am I correct in guessing all three strikes have to be in the state of California, or can 1-2 of the earlier strikes be in another state?

If the former is true, is the optimal choice after 2 strikes to leave California permanently (other than ceasing criminal activity of course)?

[dragonwriter]

> For the California three strikes law, am I correct in guessing all three strikes have to be in the state of California

The prior strikes don't have to be in California or under California law, but if they are convictions from another jurisdiction, the conviction must include all the elements of a California offense which would be countable as a prior strike (one that is classified as a “serious or violent felony”.)

The final strike must be a conviction under California law.

> If the former is true, is the optimal choice after 2 strikes to leave California permanently

Well, I suppose, but note that sonething like 23 other states and the Federal government have three strikes laws, too, and many of them (including the federal one) consider prior strikes from other jurisdictions.

And habitual criminals aren’t often warmly welcomed by foreign immigration authorities.

[bradleyjg]

Three strikes and you’re out isn’t about retribution, it’s about the strong evidence that the specific deterrence and rehabilitation effect of prison will not work on a particular individual.

[p_j_w]

>rehabilitation effect of prison

There is no such effect in the USA. Prisons are 100% not designed to rehabilitate anyone here.

[xtracto]

What do you think of Danny Trejo's rehabilitation [1]?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Trejo#Life_of_crime_and_...

[p_j_w]

One person rehabbing doesn't invalidate the mountains of evidence the other way.

[burnished]

Anyone guilty of wage theft getting hit by that law?

Just saying, in practice its clearly not about jailing menaces to society.

[bradleyjg]

Do you know of anyone that’s been convicted of wage theft, sent to prison, convicted of a new count of wage theft, sent to prison, and convicted of a new count of wage theft

… or did you just want to flog your hobbyhorse regardless of how poor the fit was?

[rurp]

Of course not, their whole point was that nobody gets prosecuted for wage theft despite it being common.

[ashwagary]

>wage theft despite it being common.

Worse than being common, I heard US wage theft eclipses all other theft in the US combined.

[burnished]

That is, funnily enough, precisely the point.

[cscurmudgeon]

Are you from the area? On the way I literally walk through multiple open air stolen goods sellers that have been around for years.

The bay area is famous for folks walking out stores with stolen goods:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/after-san-francisco-sho...

You can kill someone with a gun and spend just 7 years in prison.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Kate_Steinle

Btw, I fully support Holmes getting punished but lets not misrepresent the ground reality.

[trinsic2]

Yea, my wife works at a retail store here in the bay area and theft so normalized its unbelievable to me. They hire low paying loss prevention staff that have 0 power to do anything and just use to their time to look daunting while following shoplifters around so they can claim insurance loss when they walk out of the store with merch. They don't call the police or do anything that could be cause for the criminals to bring a suit against the store for violating their rights.

[throwaway5959]

It's pretty disgusting how little jail time she's receiving for the scope of her crimes.

[sebzim4500]

11 years is quite a long time and seems suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money.

IMO the reason it seems low is that people get such unreasonably long sentences for doing far less.

[dragonwriter]

> 11 years is quite a long time

And 11 federal years is a longer sentence than 11 years in most state systems, since there is much less opportunity to serve less than a full sentence in the federal system (short of executive pardon/commutation). There’s very limited good conduct time, but no systematic parole eligibility and early release.

[stametseater]

> suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money.

Agreed. Of course she deserves more prison time for scamming the patients, but she wasn't convicted for that.

[adrr]

Stealing tens of millions from VC funds that have multi billion dollar portfolios. Thats the scope. Compared to stealing catalytic converter off someone making $40k a year and who has $2,000 in the bank and will need to spend half their savings to replace their catalytic converter.

[thih9]

> If you steal more than $5K three times in California (...)

Possible typo, linked article lists $950.

Quote: "Grand Theft is punishable under California's “Three Strikes” system. (...) If you get three “strikes” on your record, you'll serve a minimum of twenty-five years in a state prison. (...) to be guilty of Grand Theft under CPC §§487(a)-(d), you must: Take property or services worth more than $950; or (...)".

Source is the same, i.e.: https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html

[IIAOPSW]

Right, but Holmes didn't steal $5k more than three times. She stole millions of dollars but only did it once. So your statute doesn't apply.

[arthurcolle]

Can't tell if serious. Can you see how the second might be seen as worse than the first? Literally perverse incentives.

"Go big or go home" and no worries! Couple years in Federal summer camp and you go back to your cushy upper class lifestyle as a consultant or startup advisor, or "executive coaching" for other future/wannabe scammers

[gumby]

To me it seems to be clearly pointing out the injustice of the "three strikes" law.

[IIAOPSW]

You may not like it but that is in fact the letter of the law. The letter does not get bent to produce the outcome that feels more fair or just. To do so is to abandon the principle of rule of law to begin with. You probably should learn at some point, the legal system is basically a pedantic genie interpreting 3 wishes. "oh I wish the 3 strikes law applied to people like Holmes as well." "Granted".

Don't blame me. Make better wishes.

[causi]

I'm flatly amazed they couldn't prove anybody died as a result of her deliberate greed-fueled negligence in providing fake medical test results. She should be charged with manslaughter.

[everforward]

I think this is harder to prove than you'd think. You can't just prove that Theranos did a blood test and someone died, you'd have to prove that if Theranos did their jobs correctly that person would have survived.

It ends up being a long chain of probabilities. Would the real test have shown a false negative? Would the treatment have definitely cured them (given that most treatments aren't 100% effective)? Would they have even sought treatment? Etc, etc.

It's kind of like how if a substance ends up causing cancer it's very hard to prove that an individual got cancer from that substance. You can see the effect in aggregate, but at an individual level it's very hard to prove they got it from this substance instead of pollution or smoking or eating too much meat or flying or whatever.

This is the same. You can say in aggregate that the patients would have lived longer with accurate tests, but it's hard to say what an individual outcome would have been.

[MPlus88]

Exactly. Knowingly endangering the lives of vulnerable people is despicable.

[everyone]

Wouldnt every individual investment count as an individual instance of theft?

[IIAOPSW]

Is each individual investment over $5k? By letter of the law, you can steal $25 a million times, or $25 million one time, but you better not steal $5k three times.

[harveywi]

The fundamental question is whether the law distributes over addition.

[rootusrootus]

She only got caught once, but as an ongoing thing I think it's safe to say that she stole more than once.

[IIAOPSW]

But did she steal more than 5k more than once. As written, you can steal $25 a million times and the law does not apply. You can steal $25 million one time and the law does not apply.

[rootusrootus]

It sounds like you're equating "steal" with "be convicted of stealing"?

[IIAOPSW]

So far as the three strikes statute is concerned, there is no difference. The law is blind.