James Mad Dog Mattis was a member of Theranoss' board. He is a four-star general who served as the former secretary for defense. However, when he testified in Elizabeth Holmes' trial on Wednesday, he looked nothing like a grandmother. He seemed confused when the defense asked him whether he had ever discussed high-throughput devices.
Mattis told Theranos Holmes that she had pricked him to give him an idea about the blood draw process when he first met her in 2011. He fell for her like a fairytale damel. He claimed that he was attracted to the Theranos device during the trial of US v Elizabeth Holmes. Young Elizabeth is now facing 10 wire fraud charges and two conspiracy to commit wirefraud, Mattis wrote to her via email.
This was something I believed in so that it could be seen in the theater.
The most shocking testimony of the trial thus far was that of Mattis on Wednesday. He claimed Holmes was in complete control of Theranos and even told board members what topics to talk about with the media. He may also have been misled by Edison, the Theranos analysisr.
Mattis, who was then the commander of US Central Command, wrote Holmes that he wanted to know how to use your device for a quick pilot project or proof-of-principle to speed its entry into our forces. He testified that he wanted to compare the new blood testing technology with the old. It never happened.
He testified that the analyzer's small size was appealing to him. The idea of running tests quickly to help wounded soldiers was appealing, especially since sick bays on ships are limited in space. He said that he was a firm believer in having this theater-ready so that it could deliver.
It was quite amazing what she was doing.
Mattis described Holmes as articulate, focused, and sharp. She also said that she was determined to work with Department of Defense. She didn't mention that Theranos did not have the resources nor the commercial launch at the time.
Mattis knows that the Theranos analyzer wasn't deployed on military helicopters or in other military operations. This is a problem for Holmes defense as she revealed to investors that Theranos devices were being deployed on Afghan soil.
Mattis, who had retired from the military in 2013, visited Theranos' headquarters in the latter part of 2013. There he saw the Theranos analyzer and didnt see the commercially-available equipment that Erika Cheung and Surekha Gangakhedkar testified Theranos was using for most of its tests.
Holmes invited Holmes to join Theranos' board to help her create a great corporate culture. His management experience would be beneficial, she said. He said that it was quite amazing what she was doing. Holmes, as a board member was more than his main source of information about Theranos tech. She was his only source of information, he stated.
Ms. Holmes was in charge.
Mattis, who joined Theranos in January, invested $85,000 in Theranos. This is a substantial amount for someone who has worked in government for over 40 years, he stated, smiling slightly.
Holmes was the main presenter at board meetings. Sunny Balwani (who is being tried separately) sometimes provided financial forecasts. However, Ms. Mattis stated that Holmes was in charge. He said that there were meetings on the board where Balwani was not present.
Naturally, this testimony presents a problem for defense as they try to shift the blame onto Balwani and others. It is consistent with Holmes' media profile during that time, which showed her as having complete control over the company.
Today's Holmes media coverage was presented directly. The Wall Street Journal published an article claiming that Theranos devices are faster, more affordable, and more precise than conventional methods. It also required only microscopic blood volumes. This article was also mentioned in a board meeting.
Loyalty is a duty
Mattis discovered that only a handful of tests were actually run on Theranos. He said that if he had known that most tests were run on third-party devices, it would have dampened my enthusiasm.
Mattis also spoke with Roger Parloff to write his Fortune article. Holmes was also available to help him decide what to say. Parloffs article stated that Theranos doesn't buy analyzers from any third party, which is false. He said that the claim was consistent in his understanding of the situation at the time. He was also given directions regarding a New Yorker article. He was forbidden from discussing how the technology worked.
Later, Mattis was emailed by a Theranos lawyer to ask him not to speak to John Carreyrou who was reporting his story on Theranos. In the email, Carreyrous's forthcoming story was described to be defaming Theranos and exposing trade secrets.
The board of directors became the board of counselors after the news was published. Jurors were shown a slide from the meeting. The only thing that was not redacted were the words "duty of loyalty".
It was all I knew that we were doing it with Theranos gear.
Richard Kovacevich (ex-head of Wells Fargo) was not discouraged from emailing Holmes and other board members with questions. Do I understand correctly, that when blood is drawn in venous tubes it is done with lab-like equipment and not Edison? These are sent to CLIA for testing. Edison is used only for FDA tests.
Holmes said that Theranos was in transition between regulatory standards. Mattis replied that he understood that Carryerou had essentially caught the company in mid-stride. Holmes didn't tell the board that Edison wasnt able to perform all tests. He testified that he believed we were using Theranos gear.
After some disappointments, Mattis stated that he started to doubt whether Edison was actually a genius. He said that he didn't know what to believe anymore about Theranos at one point. In late 2016, he resigned from the board as a member because he knew he would be nominated for Secretary of Defense.
As damaging as his testimony was, it seemed that Mattis was also easily confused. Although he was unsure where Holmes had met him for the first, he did know that it was either before or after a speech in San Francisco. He also did not recall if he had purchased stock options in the company, although the defense presented the paperwork. Mattis answered the question about how much he earned a year as a member of the board. However, documents presented by defense showed that he actually earned $150,000 per year.
Mattis refused to concede that Holmes had not told him that the tech was ready. He insisted on the fact that Holmes had said the tech was ready for deployment in the field to compare with blood tests.
Mattis stated that I assumed it would include more than a few tests or it would be ineffective.
