Skip to content
Federal Criminal Trialtrial-daytrial-dayRobert S. LeachKevin M. DowneyElizabeth A. HolmesredirectrecrossDay 43 - December 8, 2021Holmes completed redirect and recross, addressing technical reliance, Balwani, investor communications, trade-secret disclosures, Walgreens, and cash timing. Limited exhibits were admitted for state-of-mind purposes, the defense rested, and the government declined rebuttal. The court preserved the renewed Rule 29 motion, requested briefing on a proposed motion to strike, and scheduled closing arguments.
← Day 42Federal Criminal TrialDay 44 →

Day 43 - December 8, 2021

Holmes Finishes Testimony; Defense Rests; Post-Evidence Motions Set

Judge Edward J. Davila
3Proceedings
2Pages
1Witnesses
903Lines
Day 43 of 51
Appearing:

Holmes completed redirect and recross, addressing technical reliance, Balwani, investor communications, trade-secret disclosures, Walgreens, and cash timing. Limited exhibits were admitted for state-of-mind purposes, the defense rested, and the government declined rebuttal. The court preserved the renewed Rule 29 motion, requested briefing on a proposed motion to strike, and scheduled closing arguments.

Full day summary

Elizabeth Holmes completed redirect and recross testimony. On redirect, she said she consulted technical personnel before describing projected capabilities, relied on validation reports, and repeated some of Ramesh Balwani's language in texts to show she was listening and avoid provoking him. She accepted that responsibility stopped with her but denied knowing every event or decision at Theranos, trying to mislead investors or patients, or framing investor presentations around only the clinical laboratory's current test menu. On recross, Holmes agreed that Theranos's trade-secret policy contemplated sharing confidential information with partners and others protected by confidentiality agreements. She confirmed that the proposed Walgreens rent model was never finalized, the rollout remained limited to 41 stores, and the $75 million Walgreens innovation fee arrived in January 2014 rather than September 2013. She also agreed that investors were entitled to truthful answers about Theranos's current capabilities. The court resolved remaining exhibit disputes by admitting limited materials only for their effect on Holmes's knowledge or state of mind, not for the truth of their contents. The defense then rested, the government declined rebuttal, and the court told the jury that the evidentiary phase was complete. Outside the jury's presence, Holmes renewed her Rule 29 motion, which the court preserved and reserved. The parties set a deadline for joint proposed jury instructions. The government announced an intended motion to strike portions of Holmes's testimony after the defense did not call its expert; the defense challenged the timing, and the court requested a written submission without ruling on the merits. After confirming juror availability, the court scheduled closing arguments to begin December 16, potentially continue December 17, and excluded December 22 from deliberations.

1. Elizabeth A. Holmes — Redirect/Recross (Continued)

Elizabeth Holmes completed redirect and recross after the morning jury check, addressing Walgreens, assay validation, Balwani's role, trade-secret disclosures, and her intent toward investors and patients before being released from the stand.

Procedural
Morning Session, Jury Check, and Witness Recall

No juror reported overnight exposure to case-related information, and Elizabeth Holmes returned to the stand under her continuing oath.

Redirect
Elizabeth A. HolmesKevin M. Downey
548 lines

Holmes used redirect to explain Walgreens communications, technical and laboratory advice, statements to Roger Parloff, and Balwani's management role. She maintained that experts informed her technology claims, denied intending to mislead investors or patients, and acknowledged ultimate responsibility while saying she did not know every event or decision at Theranos.

Recross
Elizabeth A. HolmesRobert S. Leach
173 lines

Holmes agreed that Theranos's trade-secret policy permitted confidential disclosures to partners protected by agreements, including Walgreens and pharmaceutical companies. She also confirmed the limited Walgreens rollout, the timing of its $75 million payment, and investors' entitlement to truthful information about current capabilities before leaving the stand.

Highlights

Elizabeth A. Holmes — Redirectevidence eventThe court admitted Defense Exhibit 7476 only to show Holmes's knowledge and state of mind concerning the Walgreens engagement, expressly not for the truth of the survey charts and graphs.Elizabeth A. Holmes — Redirecttestimony highlightHolmes explained that she sometimes repeated Balwani's language in texts to show she was listening and avoid provoking him, and she described allowing him to take control of areas he said he would fix.Elizabeth A. Holmes — Redirect“YES. SUNNY WOULD OFTEN BLOW OFF STEAM OR VENT THROUGH TEXTS, AND I TRIED TO NOT IGNITE HIM IN THE WAY THAT I RESPONDED. AND I KNEW THAT REPEATING BACK TO HIM THINGS THAT HE HAD SAID TO ME SHOWED THAT I WAS PAYING ATTENTION, THAT I WAS LISTENING TO HIM, AND I WOULD DO THAT TO SHOW HIM THAT I UNDERSTOOD THE POINT THAT HE WAS MAKING, I'M PAYING ATTENTION, I'M LISTENING.”— Elizabeth A. HolmesHolmes offered an alternative explanation for texts in which she echoed Balwani's concerns or language.Elizabeth A. Holmes — RedirectadmissionHolmes accepted that responsibility stopped with her while denying awareness of every event or decision at Theranos and denying that she tried to mislead investors or patients.Elizabeth A. Holmes — Redirect“I WANTED TO CONVEY THE IMPACT THE COMPANY COULD MAKE FOR PEOPLE AND FOR HEALTH CARE. THEY WERE PEOPLE WHO WERE LONG-TERM INVESTORS, AND I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THIS COMPANY COULD DO A YEAR FROM NOW, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, TEN YEARS FROM NOW. THEY WEREN'T INTERESTED IN TODAY OR TOMORROW OR NEXT MONTH. THEY WERE INTERESTED IN WHAT KIND OF CHANGE WE COULD MAKE.”— Elizabeth A. HolmesHolmes framed her investor communications as presentations about long-term potential rather than current laboratory operations.Elizabeth A. Holmes — RecrossconfrontationThe prosecution used Theranos's 2012 trade-secret policy to establish that it contemplated sharing confidential information with partners, vendors, consultants, and others protected by confidentiality agreements. Holmes agreed Walgreens was a partner with such an agreement and that Theranos shared confidential information with Walgreens and pharmaceutical companies.Elizabeth A. Holmes — Recrossevidence eventUsing Theranos's cash spreadsheet, the prosecution established a $587,000 Comerica balance at the end of September 2013 and that the $75 million Walgreens innovation fee arrived in January 2014 rather than September 2013.

2. Exhibit Admissibility Proceedings and Rule 29 Motion

The evidence closed, Holmes renewed her reserved Rule 29 motion, and the court deferred ruling on a government request to strike portions of her testimony before setting the schedule for closing arguments and deliberations.

Procedural
Exhibit Admissibility Proceedings

The court admitted limited portions of two defense exhibits solely for Holmes's state of mind, kept the remaining customer-feedback material out, and then marked the close of evidence after the defense rested and the government declined rebuttal.

Procedural
Renewed Rule 29 Motion Hearing
56 lines

Holmes renewed her Rule 29 motion, which remained preserved and reserved. The court set the jury-instruction schedule and accepted briefing on the government's proposed motion to strike portions of Holmes's testimony.

Procedural
Seated-Juror Scheduling Inquiry

The court resolved juror scheduling conflicts, set closing arguments for December 16, reserved December 22 as a non-deliberation day, and directed counsel to coordinate closing-argument timing.

Highlights

Exhibit Admissibility ProceedingsrulingAfter initially sustaining the government's objection to Exhibit 7586A, the court reconsidered an entry describing cross-checked results and admitted only the first-page email for its effect on Holmes's knowledge and state of mind. The remaining phlebotomist reports stayed excluded, and the prior ruling on the broader customer-feedback records remained unchanged.Exhibit Admissibility Proceedingsprocedural actionThe defense rested after the exhibits were resolved, the government declined to present a rebuttal case, and the court informed the jury that the evidentiary phase was complete and closing arguments would follow.Exhibit Admissibility Proceedings“AND, YOUR HONOR, WITH THAT RESOLVED, MS. HOLMES RESTS.”— Kevin M. DowneyDefense counsel formally ended the defense case after the exhibit issues were resolved.Renewed Rule 29 Motion Hearingprocedural actionAfter the close of evidence, the defense renewed Holmes's Rule 29 motion. The court recorded that the motion remained preserved and reserved, and the government did not object to addressing it after a verdict if necessary.Renewed Rule 29 Motion Hearingprocedural actionThe government announced that it intended to seek exclusion of portions of Holmes's testimony after the defense did not call its expert. The defense challenged the timing and cited the absence of contemporaneous objections; the court requested the government's written position and made no merits ruling.Renewed Rule 29 Motion Hearing“IT IS THE GOVERNMENT'S INTENTION TO MOVE TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE TESTIMONY, AND WE WANTED TO RAISE THIS ISSUE WITH THE COURT AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SCHEDULE AND TALK ABOUT THE APPROPRIATE WAY FOR US TO DO THAT AND TIMING FOR THAT.”— Robert S. LeachThe statement announces the government's planned evidentiary motion after the defense declined to call its expert.Seated-Juror Scheduling Inquiryjury eventAfter confirming Juror Number 5's availability and checking for other conflicts, the court adopted a schedule under which the jury would return for closing arguments on December 16 and would not deliberate on December 22.
← Day 42Federal Criminal TrialDay 44 →