In January 2022 Elizabeth Holmes was convicted on 4 counts of defrauding investors in Theranos, her biotech startup that was only lacking in the bio and tech factors. It wasn’t until November of last year that Holmes had her sentencing–11 years and 3 months–but she didn’t have to report to prison until after she had given birth to her second child (with hotel heir Billy Evans). Invicta Evans arrived at the beginning of this year, and Holmes lost a bid to remain home on bail until the appeals process played out (a bid that wasn’t helped by her buying a one-way ticket to Mexico). So finally, on May 30 Holmes turned herself in at Federal Prison Camp Bryan in Southern Texas. That was exactly 6 weeks ago, and yesterday it emerged that her sentence has already been reduced by 2 years, per online records from the Federal Bureau of Prisons:
Convicted ex-Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes is now scheduled for early release, online records show.
In November 2022, the California former biotechnology entrepreneur was sentenced to 11 years and three months for defrauding investors in the failed Silicon Valley startup that sought to revolutionize blood testing.
On Tuesday, Federal Bureau of Prisons records showed Holmes sentence was reduced to nine years with a scheduled release date of Dec. 23, 2032–meaning she will be released two years early.
Holmes, 39, reported to a minimum-security, federal women’s prison camp located in Bryan, Texas, on May 30.
A spokesperson for the federal agency confirmed the reduction to USA TODAY on Tuesday but said they could not provide additional details about Holmes’ slated early release citing “privacy, safety, and security reasons.”
According to a statement from the federal agency, some inmates are eligible for release early via court orders such as a compassionate release due to old age and medical conditions or clemency.
Inmates can also have their sentences reduced for good conduct, including completing job assignments and completing substance abuse program courses, the Bureau of Prisons said in a statement.
Gained time can also be revoked over disciplinary concerns or other infractions, the agency said.
How on earth did she finagle this? What possible “good conduct” could she have performed in just 6 weeks that merited already shaving off 2 years? I understand the Bureau citing security concerns for why they can’t comment further, at least right now. But I can’t imagine that will stand for long, not with the high profile of her case. The only other Holmes news I’m aware of since she reported to prison was about a month ago her lawyers argued that she couldn’t afford the other part of her sentence–to pay $250 a month to the victims she scammed. It’s a tasteless argument from someone whose partner is the heir to a 70-year-old, multiple property hotel business in Southern California, and besides I don’t see how that could relate to the reduced time. But what do I know? All I can do is report (and judge and cast aspersions on) what I see, and between this and NXIVM’s Allison Mack being released a year early from her sentence just last week, I think we can all see clearly that justice is not (color) blind in this country.
Lastly, for my fellow nerds who remember by heart their fourth grade multiplication tables: 6 weeks is 42 days. Elizabeth Holmes got her sentence reduced by 2 years after serving in prison for less time than Liz Truss was Prime Minister of the UK.
Photos are screenshots from YouTube, credit Getty and Glamour
“A spokesperson for the federal agency…said they could not provide additional details about Holmes’ slated early release citing “privacy, safety, and security reasons.””
Pardon me?! Since I am at a loss to understand how and why a scammer who was a flight risk (!!!) has managed to earn time off for good (!!!) behavior in less than two months, I humbly believe “privacy, safety, and security” reasons for not explaining how this happened to be bullsh!t.
She also has really really good lawyers. There’s a podcast exposing all kinds of similar time-off deals in South Carolina’s prison system ( True Sunlight, formerly Murdaugh Murders), and with the right lawyer and judge, well…..
This is standard for all federal prisoners. The BOP determines the anticipated release date based on the sentence given in court and calculating ahead of time “good time” credit.
There is no special consideration needed. No “good” lawyers needed. No physical characteristics are taken into account. It is the same for all prisoners. Federal prisoners do a certain % of their sentence unless it is a statutory mandatory sentence in which case you’d do every day of it behind bars.
About 6 months before your release date, prisoners are moved to halfway houses near their homes and complete their sentences there.
The only thing I can think of is that her good behavior consisted on her giving information about another person or entity who has also committed a wrongdoing.
This may be pre-booking the maximum good conduct credit which will be reduced if she misbehaves in any way. The system might be set up to show her earliest possible release date which will be adjusted for any infractions during the next nine years.
That’s my understanding–they’re assuming her behavior will be “good” and if it’s not that time is coming back on her sentence. There was some discussion of this on the theranos reddit and this is basically no surprise and pretty standard.
Would appear to be so as her partner-in-crime also had his sentence “reduced” by an amount equivalent to what would be his ‘good time’.
Hate this.
There was an extensively researched article in vanity fair or something a few years back when this mess started. It talked about how she met her partner and how she went after him after researching him and his family (it was really creepy) and the reason they weren’t getting married and didn’t plan to was so that no one could come after his money when all this went down but she could still live the high life. His family apparently saw through all her schemes and attempted interventions etc but he wouldn’t have it. It’s one of the reasons his parents bought the house across the street from them, they can establish a relationship with the babies and fight for custody if needed.
Also, she will get out in less than 5 years is my bet. Her victim game is strong.
Her victim game is super strong. She garnered a puff piece in the New York Times this past May, which resulted me in cancelling my Times subscription.
Hey all, I’m a criminal defense lawyer (state, not federal). My recollection from my time in the federal system is that this is absolutely standard. In the federal system your serve 85% of your sentence. In contrast, in California for low level felonies (non strikes and non sex) you only serve 50% at MOST. Usually it’s actually 33%. This appears to just be a standard calculation of her out date.
She should do all the time, but why should her partner pay her fines? It’s not HER money and he didn’t defraud anyone. That’s her financial weight to carry as part of her punishment , if chooses to help her fine but if he doesn’t he is not wrong.
She will be out in six months to a year. Just watch how whiteness and privilege work.
True, sadly.
Everything you just said Ameerah M.
It’s federal, she won’t be out that quickly. Her sentence may be reduced more as time passes, credits earned, but she’ll be in for many years. My sister is with the federal BOP, this is pretty common.
The people whose lives she destroyed with her BS test results were mostly poor…and on Medicare/Medicaid….
And there you go😪
Yup ! So disgusting what she did.
I loathe this predator and scammer. She’s utterly repulsive. I feel sorry for her child and hope the father’s a really good parent. But if he can’t protect himself from taking on a malignant narcissist as a partner, it’s hard to imagine that he’d protect his child from such a mother.
They have two children now. The daughter is the second.
Every time a story about her comes up, I wonder WTF is wrong with that man, getting involved in this mess and *having children* with her. What the hell??
Worth nothing here that not only did she scam old rich dudes, her tech didn’t work and provided false positives and negatives to people who had/didn’t have serious diseases. It’s not just financial crimes here. That she gets a moment off her sentence is gross to me.