[ad_1]
A 12-member group of 7 men and 5 women was sworn in on Thursday.
On Thursday, a jury of seven men and five women took an oath on Elizabeth Holmes’ criminal fraud trial, accusing the founder of Theranos Inc. of defrauding investors and patients.
The team was selected from approximately 100 people after completing a 28-page written questionnaire, many of whom were further questioned by judges and lawyers in court. The jury includes at least one woman who disclosed her personal experience of abuse, a subject that may prove to be at the core of deciding whether the entrepreneur is guilty or innocent.
The 37-year-old Holmes faces more than a dozen charges of fraud and conspiracy. If convicted, she could be sentenced to up to 20 years in prison. This is one of the most high-profile prosecutions in the history of Silicon Valley, and the trial in the Federal Court of San Jose, California may last more than three months. The opening debate is scheduled for September 8.
Holmes’ lawyers stated that they might argue in the trial that her mental health was damaged by the “decade-long psychological abuse” of co-defendant Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani. The latter is her former romantic partner and company president. Balwani denied these allegations and will face a separate fraud trial early next year.
In the two days of open court, the reduction in the number of juries was mainly about two questions: whether potential jurors had widely promoted Sherlock Holmes in the past few years, and whether they had any personal experiences of domestic abuse.
Merrie Jo Pitera, a jury consultant at Litigation Insights in Overland Park, Kansas, said that for any particular juror, this experience does not guarantee that they will be on the side of Holmes. Pitera said that jurors with a history of abuse, referred to by professional consultants as “knowledgeable people”, often have a huge influence in the deliberation process of the verdict.
“For these jurors, filtering theories and evidence through their sensitivity to clarify the stories they believe will be a new field,” Pietra said. If Holmes’ description of the abuse “is inconsistent with how they understand the abuse based on personal experience, then they can be consistent with the prosecutor’s version of what happened. It can go both ways.”
Another jury consultant, Rachel York Colangelo of Magna Legal Services, said that Holmes’ success may depend on whether the defense team can reduce her from a media celebrity to an ordinary person. .
York said: “She needs people to see her as a fragile young woman controlled or influenced by what she calls her abuser, not this cunning, manipulating person.”
There are few details about the work, family and interests of the jurors in the process of selecting the jury. This information is mainly contained in the questionnaires filled out in advance by the jurors, which are held privately by the U.S. District Judge Edward Davila and the lawyers. The team includes five alternate members-three women and two men-in case any jurors withdraw or be expelled.
The case is United States v. Holmes, 18-cr-00258, District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose).
[ad_2]
Source link