Money. Romance. Tragedy. Deception. The story of Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos is an unbelievable tale of ambition and fame gone terribly wrong. How did the world’s youngest self-made female billionaire lose it all in the blink of an eye? How did the woman once heralded as “the next Steve Jobs” find herself facing criminal charges — to which she pleaded not guilty — and up to decades in prison? How did her technology, meant to revolutionize health care, potentially put millions of patients at risk? And how did so many smart people get it so wrong along the way? ABC News chief business, technology and economics correspondent Rebecca Jarvis, along with producers Taylor Dunn and Victoria Thompson, take listeners on a journey that includes a multi-year investigation. You'll hear exclusive interviews with former employees, investors, and patients, and for the first-time, the never-before-aired deposition testimony of Elizabeth Holmes, and those at the center of this story.
In a series of new episodes, "The Dropout: Elizabeth Holmes on Trial" goes inside the courtroom, breaking down the evidence and keeping score for both sides as 12 jurors decide the fate of the Theranos founder and new mother. Three years after she was first charged, we find out how this saga finally ends.
'20/20': The Rise and Con of Elizabeth Holmes
The new Hulu limited series based on this podcast and starring Oscar-nominee Amanda Seyfried as Elizabeth Holmes is out now. And in case you missed 20/20’s behind-the-scenes look at the show, we wanted to drop it in this feed, so you can listen now. You’ll hear from the stars of the Hulu series and a member of the jury that convicted Elizabeth. And be sure to follow the 20/20 podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you're listening now for more true crime stories from ABC News.
Three years after Elizabeth Holmes was charged with 11 counts of fraud, the verdict we’ve all been waiting for is finally in. After seven days and over 50 hours of deliberation, the 12 members of the jury -- one of whom gave us details that you’ll hear for the first time on this podcast -- found Holmes guilty on four counts. They were hung on an additional three. How did they reach these conclusions? And what happens next? What will affect Elizabeth’s sentencing, and how will the appeal process work in this case? Finally, what will the ripple effects be for Silicon Valley?
More than three months, 32 witnesses and three juror dismissals after the criminal trial of Elizabeth Holmes began, attorneys for the prosecution and defense had the chance to make their final appeals with closing arguments. Who presented the most compelling case? What resonated most with the eight men and four women of the jury? Whatever the case, the fate of Elizabeth Holmes could be days away from being decided.
The Defense Rests
The testimony of Elizabeth Holmes continues this week, finally concluding after seven days. And in a surprising move, the defense calls no further witnesses, resting its case. So after three months and dozens of witnesses, who came out on top? Will the defense strategy pay off? Soon, both sides will have one last shot to make a case in closing arguments before 12 jurors decide the fate of Elizabeth Holmes.
Accusations and Evasions
This week, the most jaw-dropping testimony in this trial yet. Elizabeth Holmes fights back tears telling the court she was raped when she was at Stanford and claims she was in an emotional and physically abusive relationship with her former boyfriend and Theranos COO Sunny Balwani, who firmly denies all allegations. Plus, the government begins its cross-examination, and while Elizabeth Holmes seemed to be able to recall her life in vivid detail throughout the defense’s questioning, her memories suddenly got more hazy, even non-existent, at times. Will the jury be thrown by the sudden evasiveness? And ultimately, will charges of abuse negate the allegations of fraud?
Reframing the Narrative
This week, Elizabeth Holmes returns to the stand, presenting herself as a confident CEO with a noble mission who also naively took experts at their word. She meticulously details how she built her business -- even admitting to having doctored those pharmaceutical documents -- but implies over and over again that she relied on information given to her by scientists, doctors and board members to solidify her understanding of where her company stood. Will it be enough to convince a jury that she had no intent to defraud investors?
Rebecca Jarvis and the team did an excellent job with this podcast and it’s worth listening to every episode from the beginning. I have not been this consumed with a podcast since listening to Raven 23, which is a must listen as well.
Great podcast. Binged it on my move to Tennessee.