Elizabeth Holmes’ prison sentence was quietly shortened by two years, new records show.
An update to Holmes’ profile on the website of the Bureau of Prisons now projects her release date as 12 December 2032, two years sooner than initially scheduled. A spokesman for the federal agency confirmed the update but said he could not comment further citing “privacy, safety, and security reasons” for inmates.
Holmes had reported to a minimum-security, federal women’s prison camp located in Bryan, Texas, on 30 May after being convicted in November 2022 on four counts of defrauding investors and sentenced to 11 years and three months. Her new date of release means she will instead serve about nine years and seven months.
She had been out on bail since she was indicted on fraud charges in 2018 over her role as the head of the failed blood-testing firm. During that time, she had two children with her partner, Billy Evans.
Inmates in the US can have their sentences reduced for good conduct, including completing job assignments, following orders, and completing substance abuse programs and other rehabilitation courses, the Bureau of Prisons said in a statement. That gained time can also be revoked or forfeited over disciplinary concerns or other infractions.
The reduction seen by Holmes is in line with federal sentencing guidelines, which states that people convicted of federal offenses must serve 85% of their mandated sentence, even if they get time shaved off for good conduct.
Lawyers for Holmes did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The sentencing change comes after her co-conspirator, Sunny Balwani, also saw two years shaved off of his 13-year sentence, with his projected date of release now 1 April 2034, according to the Bureau of Prisons website.
Holmes and Balwani were convicted in separate trials for their actions at the head of Theranos, a multibillion-dollar biotech company that collapsed spectacularly after reporting from the Wall Street Journal and others revealed its technology to be largely fraudulent.
Government lawyers for the prosecution teams did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Holmes will also face three years of supervised release after her sentence ends and has been ordered to pay $452m in restitution to victims of the fraud, though a judge has delayed those payments due to her “limited financial resources”.
Lawyers for Holmes have appealed her conviction, and proceedings for that process have been under way while she serves her sentence.
The only reason she went to prison in the first place is because she defrauded wealthy capitalists. I fully expect to see her out in less than five.
I’m sorry, what now? She stole people’s money, was ordered to pay it back, then was told she didn’t have to pay it back right now because if she did she wouldn’t have any (stolen) money left…? The fuck kinda billshit is that?
Before too many people come in saying she needs a longer sentence just a quick reminder; The singular only reason she is serving time at all is because she stole money from other rich assholes. Had she just scammed the poor rubes likes us here as the top class is supposed to do she would probably still be on several boards and gotten press coverage as the “inspirational power woman who bounced back”.
She scammed rich investors AND poor consumers. And most importantly, she has put the lives of many people in danger by knowingly providing them with erroneous medical information.
It doesn’t matter to me the reason she’s going to jail, I just want her to stay there for a very long time because she’s dangerous and I don’t believe this kind of people can be reabilitated.
I don’t think this is as big of a thing as the news make it out to be. It’s literally on par with sentencing guidelines for everyone else.
The real annoying thing is that this kind of crime should be higher on the sentencing guidelines because the victims are far reaching.
Maybe I’m the only one. If so, happy to hear any comment on why you think that the reduction itself is a bad thing :)
It’s literally on par with sentencing guidelines for everyone else.
But it’s not. It’s on par with treatment for other people like her. It’s not the case for the vast majority of prisoners in the USA.
The real annoying thing is that this kind of crime should be higher on the sentencing guidelines because the victims are far reaching.
If your argument is that the sentence should be longer than the one given, how do you also say that you have no issue with it being shortened? Those are opposites.
why you think that the reduction itself is a bad thing
In general, I’m not. But I’m extremely against unfair application of the reduction to people like her, leaving others to suffer needlessly.
Absolutely disgusting. Any facade of justice in the USA is just that, a facade.
Inmates in the US can have their sentences reduced for good conduct, including completing job assignments, following orders, and completing substance abuse programs and other rehabilitation courses
She’s been in a bit over a month. 42 days.
american politics and justice is such a joke.