"Fraud, you say? That's dangerous talk."
Raymond's eyebrows slightly raised. He spoke in a soft voice, warning-like, but there was no hostility in his tone.
"Without evidence, slandering soone could lead to a defamation lawsuit. It’s best to be careful. Defamation cases are hard to win, but if soone decides to harass you, you could end up wasting a trendous amount of ti and money…"
I hired Raymond as my lawyer so I could share confidential information more freely. Yet, here he was, spouting real legal advice, and I guessed why.
‘He still doesn’t trust .'
There's a duty of confidentiality between a lawyer and a client, but this duty applies only to the lawyer. In simple terms, while Raymond can't disclose my statents, I could spread his words if I wished. It made sense for him to be cautious.
‘Well, no matter.'
Still, it wasn’t entirely unproductive. At least this way, one of us could ask questions comfortably. It was kind of like playing twenty questions. I would ask, and Raymond would answer in roundabout ways.
"Do you know a law firm called Morrison & Sullivan?"
"No, that’s a new na to ."
"They're one of the top law firms in Silicon Valley, especially prominent in the startup sector."
It seed out of the blue, but there must be a reason he brought it up.
"Must be Theranos’s law firm then."
"That's right. Theranos has them on retainer. They haven’t gone to court, but I know they’ve filed several lawsuits already. At least three or four that I know of…"
Usually, lawsuits that don’t reach court are hard to find out about, but Raymond had dug up this information through his legal connections.
"Most CEOs consider lawsuits a last resort. But Theranos’s CEO is different. There’s a rumor that Hols always calls the lawyers at the first sign of trouble."
‘Could this be why?'
The reason this scam went undetected for so long. Maybe Hols had been silencing any suspicions with lawsuits.
"Most of Hols’s lawsuits were for defamation, then?"
"No, it was mostly for breach of confidentiality."
"Breach of confidentiality?"
"It mostly concerned leaked proprietary technology."
I couldn’t help but chuckle. Proprietary technology? Again, there is no such technology.
‘The empty wagon makes the most noise' seed an apt description.
Then, Raymond’s expression hardened.
"This is not sothing to take lightly. The mont you publicly call Hols a fraud, she will not hesitate to sue you for defamation."
I had already decided to publicly expose Theranos as a fraudulent group. Given Hols’s tendencies, a lawsuit was inevitable. But I wasn’t particularly worried.
"Isn’t it extrely difficult to win a defamation case?"
‘In the U.S., freedom of speech is protected under the First Andnt. They generally side with freedom of speech, which would be overwhelmingly in my favor.’
However, Raymond offered an unexpected opinion.
"Typically, yes, but your case is an exception. There’s a high likelihood it could unusually favor the plaintiff."
If it went to court, it implied I might be at a disadvantage. Raymond then began to explain why.
"To establish defamation, you need three main elents: a false statent of fact, actual malice, and damages."
Raymond counted off on his fingers as he continued.
"The biggest reason defamation suits are difficult is that proving actual damages is hard. Honor is an intangible value and hard to quantify. The burden of proof lies entirely with the plaintiff. But…"
"My situation is different. If I raise suspicions of fraud, investors will pull their funding."
"Exactly. The damage can be specified in objective figures."
My exposure would evaporate around 10 billion dollars. Normally, proving such damages is challenging, but not in this case.
"Moreover, you’ll be starting with the intention of reclaiming investnt funds, which they will argue as ‘actual malice.'"
“I am rely fulfilling my duty of good faith as an asset manager.”
“That only applies if you never et Hols. However, if by any chance you do et and a conflict arises…”
“There might be circumstances proving malice.”
“Indeed.”
But, there was a strong likelihood that I would have to confront Hols. If we clashed every step of the way, it would give them a pretext to claim a ‘hostile relationship.’
“Then it all boils down to the first criterion, ‘false statent of fact.' If you lose, you might have to compensate for the entire investnt loss. Considering the scale of the investnt, it could be an astronomical sum.”
This aspect should not be overlooked. If I lose, I would have to cough up the entire $10 billion.
Raymond looked at with more seriousness in his eyes.
“The crux of winning or losing lies in proving the act of fraud.”
I plan to portray Hols as a cunning fraudster. Hols will retaliate, claiming intolerable defamation.
Defamation vs. Fraud.
These two weighed against each other with $10 billion at stake.
“If you want to win, you need to prove fraud. But that’s no easy task, because proving fraud is as challenging as defamation. There are three key conditions here too…”
Raymond began explaining again, folding his fingers one by one.
“First, misrepresentation. You must show that Hols made claims different from the truth. The Johns Hopkins report you secured should prove this easily. It’s clearly a false claim to anyone who sees it.”
I already secured decisive evidence. Yet Raymond’s expression did not brighten, because the next hurdle was even more daunting.
“The second requirent is intent. You must prove that the other party knew the information was false and intentionally deceived. This won’t be easy because…"
“They might claim it was a mistake.”
“That’s right. Or they could bla incompetence. ‘An employee rushed and used the Johns Hopkins logo without noticing the disclair. It was a mistake, and we’ll correct it.’ Proving intent becos very hard then.”
It’s a ridiculous excuse, but legally, it works. Intent is a realm difficult to prove objectively. If Hols insists ‘there was no such intention,’ the burden to prove the lie falls on .
“Lastly, the most important is ‘damages.' You need to concretely show that you suffered losses believing Hols’s falsehoods. However, you haven’t suffered any, as you didn’t invest in the first place.”
“So, the most important thing is the voices of the victims.”
“Exactly.”
The actual investors must step forward to claim damages. Usually, investors are the most enraged in fraud cases…
But this ti it's a bit different.
Recalling my past life mories, even when Hols stood trial, there were not a few investors defending her.
Moreover, many prominent figures remained silent, probably embarrassed to admit they were duped by such a shoddy scam.
That’s the problem.
“If the investors don’t testify to their damages, is establishing fraud still possible?”
“That would make it considerably difficult.”
Raymond’s response was without hesitation.
I sighed inwardly.
‘Proving the lie isn’t the problem…'
The crux of this case isn’t just finding the falsehoods. It’s crucial to persuade the victims to testify.
Put simply, making high-profile figures publicly admit ‘I was duped by a re twenty-sothing-year-old woman’ will be quite tricky.
“Understood.”
I nodded, taking in Raymond’s advice.
The difficulty had sharply increased, but it wasn’t impossible with the right strategy and planning.
As I was lost in thought, Raymond spoke again.
“Put your worries about Theranos aside. I also checked due to a missing docunt, but there wasn’t anything particularly problematic.”
He said this, but his words ended with a bitter smile.
“Lawyer instincts kicked in, reflexively asking for docunts, and I ended up displeasing a valuable client.”
That ‘valuable client’ probably refers to Kissinger. That gives a clearer picture.
Kissinger cherished Hols like his own granddaughter. Then one day, a lawyer shows up out of the blue and whispers, ‘The technical evidence is missing, and Hols is stalling on providing it.’
No matter how indirectly stated, that carries a specific suspicion.
Kissinger, realizing this, must have been furious. ‘Don’t recklessly accuse a child who is like my granddaughter. Don’t nitpick without evidence.’
However, Raymond would be in a difficult position if actually asked to produce evidence because Theranos is withholding the docunts.
Even if evidence is obtained, if Hols cleverly skirts around it, the old man might be deceived again.
“Theranos is a solid company. That’s why I invested a whopping six million dollars.”
Raymond’s words made chuckle involuntarily.
Six million dollars is pocket change for the Mosley family. It must have been money reluctantly thrown in under client pressure.
“Furthermore, I recomnded the investnt to several clients. I would never have done that if there had been anything suspicious.”
A bitter smile played on Raymond’s lips.
I think I know why.
Regardless of the context, Raymond is the one who introduced and promoted investnt in Theranos. Essentially, he's a person who produced victims.
“Theranos is not a scam.”
Raymond asserted firmly.
He has to say that because otherwise, he becos the perpetrator.
If he had suspected fraud yet still recomnded others invest?
Raymond would beco an accomplice to the perpetrators.
Only by continuing to be unaware of the fraud can he be seen as a victim.
Thus, Raymond will continue to deny any fraud publicly.
‘Surely not that recorder…’
Suddenly, I rembered the recorder at the start of our eting today.
I belatedly realized why Raymond wanted to record this eting.
If I ever expose Theranos as a fraud, he wanted to prove that he was not in cahoots with .
—No matter what evidence Ha Si-heon presents, I believed it was not a scam.
He had created evidence in advance to argue that.
In truth, Raymond is probably the person who most wants to reveal the real nature of Theranos.
If this case is proven to be a real fraud, Raymond’s reputation would plumt at that point.
But for him, it’s better to be seen as a victim who silently aided Theranos’s scam than to be a complicit perpetrator.
So, even if he knows there’s a problem, he can't step forward himself.
He has to use soone else’s hands.
Here, that ‘soone else’ is .
Raymond continued speaking slowly.
“Soon, Theranos’s private equity round is scheduled to proceed.”
Startups go through various stages of fundraising. A private equity round involves institutional investors and large capital entering the stage.
“If there is a problem, it will be revealed during this process.”
Raymond seed anxious about the scam being exposed during this process.
However, that’s just a groundless fear.
I know from the future.
In this round, Theranos is valued at a staggering ten billion dollars.
“Why exactly…”
Once again, I wonder.
Why did no one see through this ridiculous scam?
I kind of know the general reason.
The flood of praise from celebrities, the future painted with flashy contracts.
It must have been an atmosphere where no one dared to interfere, saying, ‘This data is too poor.’
But so far, based on what has been investigated… the evidence is too scant.
To think that even major investors were deceived by such shoddy docuntation…
There must be another crucial reason.
There is still a truth I don't know.
‘Should I dig into the victims…?'
Only the victims themselves truly know the real reason.
Those who remained silent even as the scam was exposed.
I need to et them to learn the full story.
At first, I thought Raymond was a victim, but that was a mistake.
He was rely pretending to be one.
I need to et the real victims.
The genuine investors who were completely deceived by Hols's fraud.
Raymond seed to read my thoughts, flashing a aningful smile.
"By the way, Prescott wants to et you,"
Prescott, the owner of the family office I advise.
He's a businessman running a mid-size hotel and resort chain in Florida, and we haven't t yet.
But, he has expressed a desire to et while on a business trip to New York.
"When I told him about your achievents at Genesis, he was very curious. He really wanted to have a direct conversation with you."
This is a stage set by Raymond.
To directly et and hear from the victims.
I might get crucial clues from this eting.
"How about Sunday?"
Raymond's question made take a mont to catch my breath.
Then I responded with a resolute tone.
"Of course, that sounds good. I will definitely make ti to et him."
User Comments
0 comments from readers