[HN Gopher] FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250...
___________________________________________________________________
FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to be released on $250M bail
Author : pseudolus
Score : 120 points
Date : 2022-12-22 18:50 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cnbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cnbc.com)
| shafyy wrote:
| It's so wrong that rich folks can just skip jail. I'm just
| reading Harari's Sapiens, and one of his points is that it's
| crazy that today it's accepted that poorer people are
| discriminated against. That many people think that being poor is
| a not something that happens by chance, but by people being lazy
| or dumb.
| stu2b50 wrote:
| Perhaps, but the issue is more that some people can't skip
| jail. No one should be in jail - they're innocent. It's a
| imperfect solution necessary because some people will flee, or
| commit further crimes (possibly retaliatory). Bail is just an
| easy "solution" - a financial hostage. For people with nothing
| to lose, it's hard to find a way to encourage good behavior
| before trial.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Why should anyone who isn't a danger to the community be held
| in jail pre-trail?
| RobLach wrote:
| In this context; someone who can't afford bail makes someone
| a danger to the community?
| xeromal wrote:
| If you have nothing, then it's pretty logical to think that
| they have less ties to the community they're in vs someone
| who has a home, business, etc and uprooting is much more
| painful if you try to flee.
| stu2b50 wrote:
| It's usually more about flight risk. "Have nothing to lose"
| is the phrase that'd be associated with people who can't
| afford bail.
|
| It's a tough situation because optimally no one who's not a
| flight risk or dangerous should be in jail. They're all
| innocent, after all, until they have trial. A financial
| hostage is just the easiest to implement.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > That many people think that being poor is a not something
| that happens by chance, but by people being lazy or dumb
|
| There are certainly motivated, intelligent poor people. But if
| you don't think lazy & dumb isn't over-represented amongst poor
| people, then you've been leading an insular life.
| rightbyte wrote:
| I am not defending the bail system but is it not set to be
| "much" given the crime and your wealth?
| jjcon wrote:
| I don't know any poor folks that have had a $250 million dollar
| bail. Bail for first time offenders ranges from $500-$2500. It
| is just collateral, you don't actually pay it if that wasn't
| clear. If you can't temporarily post bond there are 100s of
| companies out there that will post for you for a small fee
| (fractions of your actual bond). Is it perfectly fair? No, but
| I don't think it is a terrible system either.
|
| Generally for first time offenders that are not a threat to
| society and unlikely to skip court, bail is waived altogether.
| Mizza wrote:
| It's wrong that poor people who aren't a threat to society are
| imprisoned because they can't afford bail, not that rich people
| aren't. Don't think that the way to get rid of the disparity of
| privilege is to take it away - it is to grant it to more.
| itake wrote:
| I see a lot of news articles in Seattle about people that
| were released from jail by a judge with no bail while they
| wait for trail and then go on to commit even more serious
| crimes (arson, rape and murder) in the following days.
|
| I think society struggles with knowing who is a threat and
| who isn't. The consequences of being wrong is rape, death,
| and arson.
|
| > released without bail and was arrested 10 hours later for
| arson
|
| https://westseattleblog.com/2022/10/crime-watch-followup-
| ars...
|
| > A judge released him [..] one week before this Monday's
| murder.
|
| https://westseattleblog.com/2022/06/crime-watch-followup-
| arr...
|
| > Fulk is a convicted felon and was arrested just eight days
| earlier in neighboring Pierce County for threatening to kill
| a Pierce Transit public safety officer.
|
| https://komonews.com/news/local/witness-describes-vicious-
| vi...
| ravi-delia wrote:
| That's because it makes the headlines- working out the real
| statistics wouldn't even be that hard and would totally
| remove the need for such sensationalist nonsense, but of
| course that doesn't pay the bills.
| jjcon wrote:
| Uhhh... what? So what level of rape/murder is
| appropriate/acceptable for criminals out on bail to
| commit, statistically speaking of course?
|
| I'm pretty sure the rest of us think it should be 0...
| but maybe that is just me. 3 notable examples in the last
| 6 months in one area... not zero... not anywhere close.
| Gasp0de wrote:
| I am not from America, but iirc bail doesn't exist after you
| have been sentenced to jail, it's only to make sure that you
| will come to your trial? In Germany, you are only held in jail
| in the time before the trial if there is a reasonable suspicion
| that you might flee the country or commit other crimes.
| xeromal wrote:
| Yeah, bail is basically a deposit promise that you'll come to
| the trial when it comes up. Some trials take a few months to
| a year or two to come up on the docket depending on how busy
| they are.
|
| Bail is usually proportional to your crime and there are
| businesses that will pay your bail if you give them 10%. They
| take the risk and will send a bounty hunter after you if you
| skip bail.
|
| Some states like California are testing out non-cash bails
| which is probably similar to what Germany does. If you do
| something evil like murder, you stay in jail until your
| trial. If you're harmless and not looking to escape the
| country, they let you go.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| > The bond was secured by equity in his family home, and by the
| signatures of his parents and two other individuals with
| "considerable" assets.
| elliekelly wrote:
| I wish we, as a society, could decide whether M is thousand or
| million and then _only_ use it to represent that one concept.
| From the headline I initially assumed his bail was only $250,000
| and I don't think I'm the only one in this thread to have made
| that mistake.
| parenthesis wrote:
| The Financial Times recently started using 'mn' for million, as
| in '$250mn'.
| moab wrote:
| I'm pretty sure you are. I've never seen M being used for
| thousand.
| [deleted]
| listenallyall wrote:
| Old-school banking, M is thousand, MM is million.
| knorker wrote:
| Sometimes MM is thousands monthly.
|
| It a strange world.
| listenallyall wrote:
| Example?
| basch wrote:
| movie production cards. roman numerals.
|
| i would not expect that to be the case in this context. you
| would also probably never mix roman numerals and arabic
| numerals like that.
| [deleted]
| fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
| Apparently M can mean thousand in finance:
| https://www.insurancejournal.com/blogs/old-republic-
| surety/2...
| soared wrote:
| M is also used for thousand in adtech - cpm is a cost per
| millie or cost per thousand.
| dahfizz wrote:
| When does M mean thousand? I've never seen that. K means
| thousand.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > When does M mean thousand?
|
| Its less common now, but historically the latin-derived "M"
| for 1000s and "MM" for millions was dominant in finance and
| accounting; metric-style "k" for 1000s and "M" for millions
| has become more popular, but you'll occasionally still
| encounter the other style.
|
| https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/fixed-
| income...
| satvikpendem wrote:
| M means milli in Latin, as in thousand (kilo comes from
| Greek). Millennium, millipede (thousand legs), and so on.
| Million just means a thousand thousands. That is why in most
| financial institutions, M means thousand, and MM means
| millions, literally thousand thousands.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Do they use MMM for billions and MMMM for trillions?
|
| k, M, B, T, Q seem like easier to read suffixes as opposed
| to having to count the number of "M"s.
| KoftaBob wrote:
| I've always found this idiotic. This isn't Renaissance
| Florence, using M to mean thousand is just financier
| gatekeeping snobbery.
| ls15 wrote:
| Which is weird to me, because MM in latin numerals is 2,000
|
| There is a way to express one million as M (horizontal bar
| above M for M * 1,000), but I think this was a later addon
| that was not used by the Romans. They probably rarely had
| to deal with numbers in the millions and if they did, they
| could just express them as a product like M * M
| berkle4455 wrote:
| If it's US-centric, especially if talking about amounts of
| money, it's million. Always.
| listenallyall wrote:
| This is totally wrong.
| happyopossum wrote:
| Nope.
| [deleted]
| KoftaBob wrote:
| M representing thousand? The only people who would think that
| are old school snobby finance guys or bankers from Renaissance
| Florence.
| pessimizer wrote:
| Right after we all learn Esperanto.
| wmf wrote:
| And remember to use gibibytes. On IPv6.
| kyleblarson wrote:
| What's the over under on the number of days before he's
| Epsteined?
| Hamuko wrote:
| I don't understand why people find it so unbelievable that some
| people would choose to end their lives than face the reality of
| spending the rest of their life in an American prison.
| twelve40 wrote:
| just a random thought, I was watching narcos and they took
| away escobars belt in a poor shithole of a Nicaraguan prison
| decades ago so he had to hold up his pants with tied plastic
| bags.
|
| the fact that the richest country on earth cannot prevent the
| suicide of one of the highest-profile criminals (and a high
| profile witness to lots of things) in a completely isolated
| controlled environment seems extremely bizarre to me. Like,
| when I've read that people are overdosing in solitary on San
| Quentin death row bizzare.
| samhuk wrote:
| I touched on this topic when this all bubbled over a week or so
| ago [0]. I got down-voted for somehow implying a comparison
| between H Epstein's pedophilia etc to SBF's financial crimes
| (which, looking back, was a rather hilarious and bizarre
| conclusion some drew).
|
| YMMV. I wish you luck!
|
| IMHO, I think that he doesn't have enough incriminating
| information about political figures to be "hit-able". He must
| have some information about the Democrats' shady financials,
| likely going way up, but let's face it, we all know that
| already. This contrasts H Epstein, who likely knew which
| political figures were pedophiles, sexual predators, and all
| that horrific business, which is far worse and likely led to
| the "anomalous events" that occurred during H Epstien's arrest.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33963097
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _must have some information about the Democrats ' shady
| financials, likely going way up_
|
| There is zero chance he has inside insight into anything.
| D.C. is filled with new money throwing around millions. The
| point isn't to get access. It's to convince the politically
| unconnected that they have access. They get a photo, the
| candidate gets cash.
| parker_mountain wrote:
| He doesn't have any "dirt" on major politicians. No point in
| keeping him quiet
| bruceb wrote:
| How does he have 10% of that? "His parents, both Stanford Law
| professors who were present in the courtroom, will put up the
| equity in their home to partially satisfy bail conditions." Sure
| their bay area home is worth millions but not that much.
| Animatronio wrote:
| The Daily Mail has more info on this:
|
| "His parents, Stanford Law professors Barbara and Alan Bankman-
| Fried, have agreed to put up the equity they own in their
| $4million California home, where he will live during his house
| arrest, as part of the bail requirement.
|
| Two other people - one relative and one non-relative - will
| fulfil the rest of the bond. It remains unclear if he is
| required to pay the full $250million or a portion of it."
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Bail is virtually always a _bond_ , guaranteed by a bail-
| bonds agency. The bailee typically puts up 10% of the value
| of the bail, so here, $25 million.
| from wrote:
| People with 8 and 9 figure bail don't go to the bondsman on
| the corner. They usually have their own armed guards from
| companies like Guidepost Solutions enforce their home
| detention and it is usually secured by bank accounts or
| real estate owned by their family or other rich people they
| know.
| bruceb wrote:
| But generally that is a fee not a deposit the detainee gets
| back. That's a big fee. From me understanding some
| jurisdictions will allow you to cut out the bailbonds
| company, and give a 10% deposit for the bail (still on hook
| for the full money) maybe that is what happened here?
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Practices are changing, and I'm not a specialist.
|
| I've described my understanding of the general case,
| however.
| exabrial wrote:
| Be nice if all those senators returned those political donations
| now
| pavlov wrote:
| FTX's bankruptcy management has said they expect to get it all
| back by legal means if necessary, and it's no excuse if you
| donated the money to a charity:
|
| https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-debtors-announc...
| gdavisson wrote:
| The Democrats' Senate Majority PAC is planning to return $1M
| contributed by SBF and $2M from Nishad Singh; the House
| Majority PAC got $6M from SBF and "will send funds in question
| wherever authorities instruct us". Source (and more details):
| https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/20/ftx-democrats-senate-majorit...
|
| My understanding is that SBF also made similar contributions to
| Republicans and conservative PACs etc, but generally hid them
| (e.g. by giving in other people's names), so those may be
| harder to track down & return.
| zwily wrote:
| Is there any evidence at all of him giving "similar" money to
| republicans, other than his own word (which is garbage)?
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Not that I've seen. The other replies seem to support it
| yet don't provide any evidence.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > Is there any evidence at all of him giving "similar"
| money to republicans, other than his own word (which is
| garbage)?
|
| The indictment (which required providing evidence to a
| grand jury for each count to establish probable cause)
| includes charges of illegal concealed-identity political
| donations. While it doesn't specify the recipients, this is
| consistent with his description of _how_ he donated to
| Republicans to avoid criticism for such donations.
| totalZero wrote:
| The indictment doesn't provide any specificity as to the
| side of the aisle relevant to the campaign finance law
| violations.
| perpocet wrote:
| Ryan Salame donated multi-millions to republicans, and was
| given 55m loan from FTX/Alameda.
| dakom wrote:
| Plot twist: it's $250M worth of Eth and the bracelet is hooked up
| to a smart contract that transfers funds if he violates the
| constraints
| mikl wrote:
| Imagine being so well-connected that someone shows up to post a
| $250M bail bond on your behalf. Must be nice.
| eternalban wrote:
| Caroline Ellison appears to be flying under the radar here.
| Granted she kept her mouth shut but what's keeping others
| uninterested here?
|
| Also any informed opinion regarding her plea deal: Generous, not-
| generous, unusual, routine? ianal but 110 years to 0 years seems
| pretty sweet. Also didn't note any agreement to forever stay away
| from other people's money (since she agreed that she "is in fact
| guilty" [of conspiracy to defraud, wire-fraud, ..]
| __derek__ wrote:
| > 110 years to 0 years
|
| Not so fast. The plea agreement does not include immunity:
|
| > According to their plea agreements, Ms. Ellison and Mr. Wang
| are expected to truthfully disclose information to
| investigators, provide requested evidence and appear in front
| of a grand jury or court proceeding if asked. In exchange, the
| government will inform the judge of the defendants' assistance
| and request lesser sentences.
|
| [1]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-associates-of-ftx-
| founder-s...
| valdiorn wrote:
| She's almost definitely working with the prosecution in
| exchange for a deal. That's been the rumour for weeks.
| annexrichmond wrote:
| I imagined that the prosecutors would have enough evidence
| without her, so that she still would have a heavy sentence. I
| guess time will tell.
| fathyb wrote:
| I'm not sure. There was almost no paper trail, no
| accounting. Testimonies will be used to fill in the blanks
| and strengthen the case. She'll get a good deal.
| eternalban wrote:
| Sure, but what does that mean in terms of protecting as yet
| unnamed persons connected to this saga?
|
| This promise to sing for prosecution is presumably not good
| news for SFB, that is understood. But SEC official names were
| being dragged into this when it broke via guilt by
| association. And that connection was via Caroline and her
| family. Maybe a nothing burger, but maybe there is actually
| some beef involved. How does this plea agreement affect that
| potential and alleged connection, in legal theory?
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Jeeze, it's not some crazy conspiracy that being the first
| to rat out your accomplices tends to leave you way better
| off, it's literally intentional, to encourage turncoats.
| eternalban wrote:
| You misunderstand. Benefit to Caroline Ellison is self
| evident. That SFB is the subject of her singing is also
| obvious. Qs are:
|
| - was this too generous?
|
| - who else besides Caroline Ellison would benefit here
| now that she has her deal? (Related to first q ..)
| [deleted]
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Which is specifically what the Coindesk article discusses.
|
| (Note that it's a _description_ of the agreement, rather than
| the full text of it directly.)
| Animats wrote:
| Here's the full text of the agreement.[1] Those are the
| tough conditions you see when a federal prosecutor has a
| really good case.
|
| [1]
| https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-
| coop...
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Thanks!
| 323 wrote:
| Trabucco is the one flying under the radar.
|
| He resigned as CEO this July, well after supposedly they tapped
| into customers funds.
|
| I'm sure we'll hear about him too, one way or the other.
| danuker wrote:
| Compared to $8 billion missing funds, the bail is a slap on the
| wrist. I wouldn't be surprised if he disappears.
| beart wrote:
| Bail is not intended to be punitive, so it is not intended to
| be a slap on the wrist.
| quantified wrote:
| What fraction of the bail is the home equity from his parents?
| Not likely more than $25mil there.
| danuker wrote:
| I only found out that the Caribbean home is $16M.
| wmf wrote:
| That's stolen. All that real estate will be clawed back in
| the bankruptcy.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Bail isn't a _punishment_ but a _guarantee for future
| appearance_.
|
| (Edited for clarity.)
| bavila wrote:
| It really is bizarre seeing how some people are complaining
| about a $250 million bond as being a "slap on the wrist".
| It's not a fine, it's not a punishment -- he hasn't even been
| convicted of anything yet. He is nothing more than a pre-
| trial detainee. And, yes, being under house arrest still
| constitutes detention.
|
| Just seems like there's so much bloodlust here against
| someone who -- under the United States Constitution -- is
| still presumed innocent until found to be proven guilty
| beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law by a jury of his
| peers. Sorry.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| Guarantee _of_ appearance, or guarantee _against_ flight.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Fair point.
|
| I was writing in the sense of "a guarantee based upon",
| though the wording I used ("against appearance") is ...
| confusing.
|
| Parent comment edited for clarity.
| CircleSpokes wrote:
| This doesn't make sense in my opinion. He basically waived the
| extradition process in the Bahamas. It is very likely doing
| that provides the court assurance he won't run. He could have
| very likely fought it for years there. Not fighting the
| extradition process and then going on the run doesn't make any
| sense to me.
| fareesh wrote:
| Will the US political parties be returning his donations?
| ttul wrote:
| Also covered on WSJ (https://www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bankman-
| fried-to-make-first...)
|
| Notably, he is going to make a plea deal:
|
| "Mr. Bankman-Fried at a later date will enter a plea on charges
| that he engaged in fraud and other offenses, the judge said."
|
| If he is doing a deal with prosecutors, you have to wonder what
| he is getting in return?
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| Maybe he's gonna give up CZ and that house of cards.
| ttul wrote:
| If I was a prosecutor, I'd definitely be wanting 100%
| disclosure of all the dirty stuff he knows others are
| engaging in. For sure, CZ is probably regretting not having
| followed through with the purchase of FTX, which he could
| have then swept under the rug.
| tosc wrote:
| > Notably, he is going to make a plea deal
|
| That's not what the article says. It says he will _enter a
| plea_ later.
|
| To enter a plea means to plead guilty or not guilty. All they
| are saying is that he hasn't said either way yet.
| jasonhansel wrote:
| Also, it's fairly common for someone to initially plead "not
| guilty," even if they're planning to change their plea to
| "guilty" later. IIRC if you plead guilty, you can't change it
| later, so it's usually best to leave your options open.
| ttul wrote:
| Thanks for clarifying this important fact...
| denimnerd42 wrote:
| Gary Wang and Caroline Ellison did make a plea deal so that
| makes it seem like they are going to fully prosecute SBF. Any
| deal SBF makes will likely be to keep him from spending the
| rest of his life in prison.
| tosc wrote:
| It has been said elsewhere that he may be able to cooperate
| with forthcoming indictments of other players, such as CZ.
| So far though this is just speculation.
| thinkingemote wrote:
| From the little I know from tv shows the plea deal is that he
| hopes to get less of a sentence in return for pleading guilty
| to some stuff.
| pavlov wrote:
| David Gerard has the best summary:
|
| _'He was released on bail for a $250 million bond -- "the
| largest ever pretrial bond," apparently -- secured only on his
| parents' home in Palo Alto, where he will be living._
|
| _'SBF will surrender his passport and remain in home confinement
| with electronic monitoring -- he'll wear a bracelet. He will also
| be required to undergo regular mental health evaluation and
| treatment. No financial transactions over $1,000 except legal
| fees, no new lines of credit, and he can't start a business.
| Also, no firearms._
|
| _'That is: Sam lost all his money in crypto, and has moved back
| into his parents' basement.'_
|
| https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/12/22/ftx-sam-bank...
| csense wrote:
| > on bail for a $250 million bond -- secured only on his
| parents' home in Palo Alto
|
| Wait what? How does that work? I thought if the bond was $X,
| that literally means you either (a) give the court $X, cash
| only or (b) sit in jail until trial.
|
| How can his bond be set at $250 million, yet the court somehow
| isn't just making him sit in jail until and unless he either
| goes to trial and is found not guilty, or he coughs up $250
| million?
| edwnj wrote:
| [dead]
| hollerith wrote:
| A financial intermediary trusted by the court pledges to pay
| the court the 250M if SBF flees and the intermediary cannot
| capture him.
|
| For typical bail amounts i.e., $50k, the intermediary usually
| demands 10% of the $50k from the defendant, but maybe SBF
| found an intermediary who'd take significently less than 10%
| of the 250M.
| stanleydrew wrote:
| Yeah you have to put up cash or collateral nominally worth
| (presumably in the court's discretion) the amount of the
| bond. This report seems incorrect.
| edf13 wrote:
| $250m secures on their home?? How much is that valued at?
| SilasX wrote:
| Well, he _is_ the master at getting collateral overvalued...
| eddsh1994 wrote:
| The house is valued at $4m - it's on Stanfords campus.
| happyopossum wrote:
| > secured only on his parents' home in Palo Alto,
|
| This part is incorrect - his parents and 2 other individuals
| with 'significant assets' signed on his bond.
| lamontcg wrote:
| That makes more sense. He probably has a billionaire friend
| or two.
| googlryas wrote:
| Should be denied access to the internet too, like most internet
| related criminals are on bond conditions.
| jrockway wrote:
| That seems needlessly cruel.
|
| I'm all for getting to the bottom of what SBF did, but he
| hasn't been convicted of any crime yet.
| emn13 wrote:
| How about: "No use of any software or device that includes
| any cryptographic algorithms."
|
| :-P
|
| Back to the stone age it is!
| grubbs wrote:
| He could still mine crypto with a pen and paper!
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| His parents' home isn't worth anything like that. Does that
| mean only a fraction of the bond value needs to be the
| security? If so, is that not bullshit?
| ravi-delia wrote:
| I mean, it's up to the bond company no? Besides, the ankle
| bracelet is doing most of the work
| annexrichmond wrote:
| More like he moved into his parents' attic? They don't have
| basements in California :P
| stevenwoo wrote:
| They do if you spend enough money. I met someone who was
| related to an executive of Intel and they had a basement with
| dumb waiter and a laundry chute from the other floors.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| I toured large house in santa clara that had a huge
| basement that was going for about 1M in 2017
| nprateem wrote:
| Sounds like a pretty damned nice $250m basement
| notyourwork wrote:
| I'm sorry but "and he can't start a business." made me laugh
| out loud.
| [deleted]
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Numerous submissions of this from other coverage. Aggregating
| those links here:
|
| NYTimes: <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/business/sam-
| bankman-frie...>
|
| BBC: <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64068810>
|
| NBC News: <https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ftx-co-founder-
| sam-bank...>
|
| WSJ: <https://www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bankman-fried-to-make-
| first...> (Paywall: <https://archive.ph/eMrPC>)
|
| Bloomberg:
| <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-22/prosecuto...>
| (Paywall: <https://archive.vn/5zOnu>)
|
| Related:
|
| - Caroline Ellison (Alameda Research) plea agreement:
| <https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/12/22/caroline-elliso...>
| <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34096548>
|
| - "The SEC's Crypto Crackdown Is Just Getting Started"
| <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-22/sec-s-cry...>
| (Paywall: <https://archive.vn/jrt8I>)
| <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34098054>
| pawelduda wrote:
| Impressive. He was just short 10B of customer funds and managed
| to come up with 250M so quickly! Must be a legendary trader.
| notyourwork wrote:
| The amount of people who opt to comment before reading is
| increasing.
| themodelplumber wrote:
| Likely needed 25M for actually posting bail. He also did a lot
| of nice things and has a lot of friends, not to mention family.
| No big stretch of the imagination here.
| jcmjcdncjdncdj wrote:
| Which bail bond company came up with the other $225M?
| c22 wrote:
| When I needed to post a large bail I couldn't afford I got
| a personal loan so I wouldn't have to forfeit the bond
| amount. Bail bond companies are mostly a tool for those
| without any assets.
| simmerup wrote:
| SBF will be banned from opening up new lines of credit.
| Don't know if that only begins after the bail starts
| though.
| c22 wrote:
| His parents wont be. In my case the loan was from a
| personal acquaintence.
| simmerup wrote:
| Right, that makes sense
| FireBeyond wrote:
| Frustratingly, if you personally post bail, typically you
| have to post the full amount (this might depend on the
| state).
|
| But bail bonds companies typically only post 10% of the
| amount.
| c22 wrote:
| No, the bond company posts the entire amount and keeps
| the 10% you paid them as their fee. This is why they
| employ bounty hunters to track you down if you try to
| skip.
| wmf wrote:
| These days I would assume it's securitized.
| pastor_bob wrote:
| The Solana Foundation
| jcampbell1 wrote:
| Bail doesn't work that way at this scale. His parents put up
| the deed to their house, and a couple of really rich friends
| showed that they have $250 million in assets and agreed to
| let the government seize them if SBF doesn't show up. No cash
| really changes hands.
| carabiner wrote:
| This system just seems insane. Why allow people to
| temporarily buy their way of jail? How is this not grossly
| unfair to the poor?
| itbeho wrote:
| It is grossly unfair to the poor and the not-so-poor.
| It's a two-tiered justice system where the politically
| connected have different rules applied to them than the
| rest of us.
| haakonhr wrote:
| Innocent until proven guilty, presumption of innocence
| and so on. The system is insane, but not for the reasons
| you seem to think. It is unfair to the poor.
| jcampbell1 wrote:
| In my experience, pretty much everyone without a record,
| or has always shown up for court gets ROR'd (released on
| own recognizance) for non violent crimes. The people that
| get screwed are the ones that skip court dates and then
| get caught again. If someone gets caught shoplifting and
| the cops find a gram of heroin in their pocket, it is
| common to be ROR'd after 24 hours in the tank if there
| are no outstanding warrants for skipping court. If they
| skip court and get caught again, the bond will be like
| $5000. If they are poor, they will spend a week in county
| jail, dry out, get on Suboxone, get assigned a parol
| officer, and hopefully be on a better path. Bail is meant
| to encourage people to show up for court and is needed
| for people who have a history of not doing that. It is
| less of a rich/poor thing, but rather a history of
| skipping court vs not skipping.
| c7b wrote:
| Didn't he say in an interview that he had "nothing left but a
| credit card with 100k debt"?
| cm2187 wrote:
| Wait. Only a few days ago he declared he had less than 100k on
| his bank account and now he forks out 250m? It's hard to believe
| anything else he said.
| jhawk28 wrote:
| His parents used their house as collateral.
| WJW wrote:
| His parents' house is worth 250 million USD? (!?!)
| randyrand wrote:
| emphasis collateral.
|
| A loan was taken out for 250M with 4M collateral.
| TuringNYC wrote:
| >> emphasis collateral. A loan was taken out for 250M
| with 4M collateral.
|
| Nice. Reminds me of how some folks recently borrowed $1B
| with crappy illiquid collateral. Round and round we go!
| jdmoreira wrote:
| How are these people paying a minimum of 1 million a year
| on interest rates?
| jacquesm wrote:
| I'm surprised anybody would be willing to risk $246 M for
| a known fraudster. And I highly doubt their home will
| still be their home when this is all over.
| bena wrote:
| His parents now have a very good incentive to make sure
| he makes it to court.
|
| Once he makes it to court, that $250 million is paid
| back. The only thing the parents lose would be the
| interest payments on the loan from now until the court
| date.
| jacquesm wrote:
| I don't see them having that kind of money. They've been
| on the receiving end of the loot, it's essentially being
| allowed to leverage stolen money in order to finance the
| bail.
|
| Probably a judge doesn't care where it comes from and the
| bail bond people see the risk the way you do but it is a
| bit weird how a person suspected of crime at this level
| is allowed to await their day in court in freedom while
| others are immediately jailed because they didn't steal
| enough...
| bena wrote:
| While it is likely true that they are likely leveraging
| assets acquired through his fraud to post bail, legally,
| we have to give them the benefit of the doubt. The only
| way I can think of that they wouldn't be allowed is if
| the assets themselves were evidence in the crimes. And
| there's also the murky bit where the house itself wasn't
| fraudulently purchased, so if SBF is found guilty and he
| must pay back all the money, if they were able to come up
| with the money through other means, they could keep the
| house.
|
| Next, they aren't using a bondsman. I doubt any bondsman
| has $250 million to dedicate to this for any length of
| time.
|
| And they are allowed to wait "in freedom" because bail
| was posted on their behalf. Those are the rules of the
| system.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| The running theory is his parents were the puppet masters
| and he is the fall guy.
| RC_ITR wrote:
| You think two law professors were running the show?
|
| Have you ever met a law professor?
|
| It's not a question of corruptability, it's a question of
| competence
| Frost1x wrote:
| I read the same two things in the article and scratched my
| head. I mean, I assume the entire $250 million mentioned
| didn't have to come from the home, the way its written it
| could be a modest home. None the less, it makes me very
| curious what the actual value of the home is estimated at
| and where he materialized that much in assets supposedly
| out of nowhere.
| [deleted]
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > Only a few days ago he declared he had less than 100k on his
| bank account and now he forks out 250m?
|
| No, he (or one or more other people on his behalf) secured a
| $250m bond. Bail bonds generally cost significantly less than
| the amount of bail; in many states with a maximum or exact
| amount set by law. In New York, the maximum is 10% up to $3000,
| 8% for $3000-$10000, 6% for the amount over $10000. At $250M
| bail, the bond is a hair over $15M.
| postalrat wrote:
| So with only $100k I can get a $250m loan? Where do I sign
| up?
| [deleted]
| rootusrootus wrote:
| $100K along with equity in your parents' house as well as a
| couple other unnamed rich people. Then sure.
| themodelplumber wrote:
| He didn't need to fork out 250M. That's not how bail works.
| throwaway4good wrote:
| How does it work then?
| c22 wrote:
| This is, in fact, how bail works. But you can often get a
| bail bond (from a third party) for 10%-20% of the bail
| amount.
| berberous wrote:
| But that 10% is a non-recoverable fee, right? It seems
| insane they would have agreed to pay a third party $25M
| as a non-recoverable fee.
| dvngnt_ wrote:
| I thought it was only if you skip town
| kickopotomus wrote:
| Not quite. You pay a bondsman 10%. The bondsman turns
| around and pays the full bail amount to the court. If you
| show up, the bondsman gets their money back from the
| court but keeps your 10% as a fee. If you don't show up
| to court, the bondsman does not get their money back and
| is left holding the bag for the other 90% of the bail
| amount.
| xorcist wrote:
| That kind of money could still save about 5000 lives from
| malaria, according to GiveWell.
|
| When push comes to shove, morals aren't easy to come by.
| Especially not when put up against some downtime with the
| family.
| mokanfar wrote:
| What bondsman has $250 million in the bank to do this?
| Seems like such an obscure niche to be in.
| kickopotomus wrote:
| I doubt they used a bondsman. $25 million is a pretty
| steep fee. They likely paid the entire bail amount and
| will get that money back once SBF shows up to court.
| TuringNYC wrote:
| What professor has $25M lying around to pay the bond?
| Yes, Palo Alto homes are expensive, but those are not
| typically the homes professors are living in.
| c22 wrote:
| Yes. I doubt they did this.
| bena wrote:
| They will likely not being using a bondsman. They are
| probably paying the bond (ostensibly) themselves. They
| are taking a $250m loan using their house as collateral.
| If SBF does not make it to court on the agreed date, his
| parents will lose their house and be on the hook for the
| rest of the loan. If he does, his parents get the $250
| million back and can pay off the loan. Until then, they
| are likely just making interest payments.
|
| You can think of bondsmen as essentially very specialized
| financial institutions. They provide loans to people. If
| you have a $5000 bond, you can pay a bondsman $500 to
| front the other $4500 for you. If you make it to court,
| they get their $4500 back and it's all good. If you don't
| make it to court, they are incentivized to find you to
| make sure you make it to court. They are usually not
| pleased to do this.
|
| You are not required to use a bail bondsman to post bail.
| jdmoreira wrote:
| They are making interest payments on 250 million USD?
| Wow! How much do these people earn?
| wil421 wrote:
| That's how you get out on a DUI. A property bond is
| different.
|
| There's no way his parents are forking over their home to
| a bails bondsmen. There's also no bail bond man who has
| $250m.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > But you can often get a bail bond (from a third party)
| for 10%-20% of the bail amount.
|
| In most states, 10% is closer the legal maximum than the
| minimum premium for a bail bond (it is often exactly the
| the legal maximum, but in NY the maximum for large bail
| amounts is much lower, asymptotically approaching 6%.)
| [deleted]
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| His parents had to put up their home for the bond.
| simmerup wrote:
| For part of the bond. Not the full amount.
| ciabattabread wrote:
| Which home?
| wmf wrote:
| The Palo Alto one.
| propogandist wrote:
| They can always move to the many homes they secured form
| their sons Ponzi scheme
| StanislavPetrov wrote:
| The home they received with stolen money or another home?
| They should be in jail as well.
| pessimizer wrote:
| Had to _give up_ their home for the bond?
|
| edit: i.e., it is far more likely to be a 25M home than a
| 250M home, because I've never heard of a 250M home.
| [deleted]
| acchow wrote:
| "The One" had an asking price of $291M. But it only sold
| for $141M
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Cd_McCdow
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > Had to give up their home for the bond?
|
| "Put up" is not "give up"; it is to offer as collateral,
| that is, they got a loan secured by a lien on the home.
| NovemberWhiskey wrote:
| Bail is a security - you only actually lose the asset
| securing bail if you abscond.
| pessimizer wrote:
| Bond is not bail. Bond is a percentage of bail that you
| pay to someone willing to put up the entire bail, and who
| will help find you if you abscond.
| Fatnino wrote:
| But it's possible they found some other money lender, not
| a bail bond specialist and got (improbably) better rates
| than 10 percent upfront, nonrefundable.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| The legal limit on bail bond premiums in New York at this
| size is 6% (plus a tiny amount), not 10%.
| PM_me_your_math wrote:
| This dude has friends in high places. No surprise however. He
| paid for them with other people's money.
| Dma54rhs wrote:
| There's no cash transfer, someone just has enough assets to
| guarantee it in case he runs.
| pearjuice wrote:
| His ex-girlfriend and CEO of Alameda really put the nail in the
| coffin. Turned on him for 250K$ bail, forfeiture of all assets
| and basically no prosecution (except some taxes) as long as she
| co-operates. Probably dropped the entire playbook of Sam and made
| the case irrefutable and ironclad.
|
| https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436/crypto-coope...
| pessimizer wrote:
| It's good that she did, because he played her for a sucker. He
| routed that entire massive fraud, which she may have barely
| understood (we'll see), through her as the CEO of a fake
| company whose only purpose was to embezzle deposits from FTX
| customers.
| ls15 wrote:
| > she may have barely understood
|
| Mathematics degree. Both parents economists.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| She's not stupid, don't downplay her intelligence. She
| absolutely had enough knowledge, education, and know how to
| see what was going on, and had every opportunity to get out.
| She didn't because, like most of the people involved, she
| thought she would be free and clear because line go up
| xdavidliu wrote:
| I thought Alameda came first, before FTX. Also, the fraud was
| on the FTX side, not Alameda, hence it doesn't make sense for
| him to blame her for it?
| __derek__ wrote:
| Isn't it a two-way fraud? Alameda defrauded FTX by
| knowingly providing worthless collateral for loans (FTT),
| which FTX fraudulently made using customer funds.
| low_tech_love wrote:
| I don't get your point. Why would you think she didn't know?
| 323 wrote:
| She's 28 and well educated. The "sucker" defense will not
| work for her.
| sschueller wrote:
| Who cashed out the whistleblower reward?
| marvin wrote:
| A real-life prisoners' dilemma right there.
| elliekelly wrote:
| What do you mean no prosecution? She's going to be a convicted
| felon. Just because there isn't going to be a trial doesn't
| mean she'll have zero consequences.
| pessimizer wrote:
| It's entirely likely she'll land on her feet, write a book,
| get a netflix documentary, and end up on daytime talk shows
| talking about her new line of hemp handbags.
|
| If she can semi-credibly claim to be mostly ignorant, and
| cooperates energetically with prosecutors, anything can
| happen.
| bandyaboot wrote:
| Dancing with the Stars.
| low_tech_love wrote:
| $5 says we'll hear about the sexual harassment charges soon.
| throwthere wrote:
| Armchair thoughts-- makes you wonder what the game is here-- the
| prosecutors want a high enough bail that SBF can make, but not so
| high that he wouldn't pay the bond.
|
| For reasons-- 1) It proves he has more funds. 99% odds he will
| declare bankruptcy once the civil judgements come, so this
| refutes SBF claims that he only has a few hundred dollars in a
| bank account somewhere.
|
| 2) Making him collect funds from more than one source so they can
| flush out some of his hidden buckets. Who knows how many wallets,
| cash and favors he's hiding, but the Feds and Internet
| investigators will be watching. Especially for movements on the
| blockchain.
| somesortofthing wrote:
| > A recognizance bond is a written commitment from the accused
| to appear in court when ordered. In return, Bankman-Fried's
| camp would not be required to meet the full collateral
| requirements on the bail.
|
| Doesn't look like that's what's happening. It's not clear how
| much money's changing hands, but it's definitely nowhere near
| the full $250m.
| low_tech_love wrote:
| I wonder if this whole thing counts as "effective altruism"?
| Maybe he is effective at scaring other crypto "adventurers" (i.e.
| people who like to play with other people's money as if they were
| in the wild west) and the number and size of scams diminishes in
| the future? That'd be a good badge to have on his boy-scout
| t-shirt (or whatever boy-scouts use).
| dinkumthinkum wrote:
| I think he already said on Twitter that stuff was just a set of
| woke shibboleths.
| jasonhansel wrote:
| If he runs, he can always spin it as a $250 million donation to
| the government.
| Finnucane wrote:
| I know the whole cash bail thing is 'problematic' but if there
| was one guy who should be forced to show up with a big bag of
| greenbacks . . .
| danaos wrote:
| Tangenially related: There's an ongoing scandal in the EU dubbed
| Qatargate[1]. It appears Qatar bribed EU politicians to buy
| influence. Starring MEP Eva Kaili, vice-president of the EU
| parliament. A journalist noted her suspicious involvement in the
| crypto space in the past [2 (article in Greek)].
|
| Quote:
|
| > In 2018, during a meeting at the Delphi Economic Forum, I asked
| the MEP how we could explain the complex blockchain technology
| and explain its potential, so that the ordinary citizen and small
| and medium-sized enterprises - as she claimed - can benefit from
| decentralised financing.
|
| > "People don't necessarily need to understand them", Eva Kaili
| had replied with a smile, after a sharp pause and a brief
| elaboration. "Cryptocurrencies are a bit like weather - you can
| enjoy their benefits without knowing in detail the process behind
| them."
|
| Well. I feel that we are barely scratching the surface with
| "Qatargate". I'm so glad to have exited crypto years ago. The
| space is filled with get-rich-quick people, apparently they don't
| even understand how blockchain works.
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_corruption_scandal_at_th...
|
| [2] https://www.lifo.gr/stiles/optiki-gonia/i-kaili-kai-lompi-
| to...
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Hijacking stories for unrelated discussion is frowned on.
|
| This would be worth a submission, however.
| gamblor956 wrote:
| Note: as a practical matter, SBF's out-of-pocket is probably
| between 25-50 million (bondsmen normally charge 10%-20%,
| depending on risk factors and bail amount), and SBF's parents
| have this much in assets and savings to cover it (and can
| probably take loans to cover any shortfall), though this will
| definitely wipe out any of their legitimate holdings.
| tootie wrote:
| And he has properties
| jcmjcdncjdncdj wrote:
| How many bail bondsmen have $225M lying around and why would
| they risk it on SBF who is a major flight risk?
| badlucklottery wrote:
| Probably very few can guarantee that much.
|
| But bondsmen don't have to just cut you loose with zero
| oversight. For a small slice of the $25m they can hire a team
| to follow him around 24/7. I assume they also put him in a
| ankle tracker and have him checking in on a strict schedule.
| All of this cuts into their profit so it's only as risky as
| they are cheap about monitoring him.
| ncallaway wrote:
| What recourse would a bail bond company have if they
| monitored him fleeing?
|
| Can they physically detain him? Or just report to the
| authorities?
| haneefmubarak wrote:
| Not only can they detain him, if he missed court, they
| can quite literally hire bounty hunters to track him down
| and bring him to the court so that they can get the money
| back.
| throwaheyy wrote:
| They are legally allowed to detain the defendant.
|
| > _If the defendant fails to appear in court, the bond
| agent is allowed by law or contractual arrangement to
| bring the defendant to the jurisdiction of the court in
| order to recover the money paid out under the bond,
| usually through the use of a bounty hunter._
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail_bondsman
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| I feel sorry for his parents - legal fees is going to financially
| wipe them out and any plans for retirement.
|
| I'd rather stick to my mediocre returns of my money market
| accounts than this crypto forex NFT nonsense.
| knorker wrote:
| His father worked for FTX for a while. He may be facing charges
| too.
| listenallyall wrote:
| > I feel sorry for his parents - legal fees is going to
| financially wipe them out and any plans for retirement.
|
| Losing your money sucks but it's preferable to losing your
| freedom. It is very likely the parents are guilty of abetting
| or enabling the fraud in some way.
|
| SBF "agreed" to be extradited, that implies some negotiation.
| The only possible incentive I can think of him agreeing to what
| is shaping up to be a slam-dunk case of a very long prison
| term, is immunity for the parents.
| wmf wrote:
| Or he just wanted out of rat-infested Bahamian prison.
| listenallyall wrote:
| I seriously doubt this. The long-term ability to improve
| one's "experience" in exchange for financial renumeration
| (i.e. bribes) is certainly much greater in Bahamas than US.
| It's also far from certain that Bahamas, on its own, could
| prosecute and convict SBF.
| moab wrote:
| How can you feel sorry for them? They're professors of _LAW_ at
| Stanford. And this white-collar crime was being committed right
| under their noses. Pynchon would have had trouble coming up
| with a plot this wacky.
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| SBF just played along with the sheer insanity of the concept
| of crypto (nothing can make nothing) and all the fools who
| gave him money - it seems that common financial sense is not
| taught to people anymore or is really in short supply these
| days.
|
| Did people actually listen to him whenever he spoke -
| whenever did any of his BS make any financial sense ???.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6nAxiym9oc
| Sebguer wrote:
| Right, he openly described what he was doing as a ponzi
| scheme on stage, and everyone just waved it off.
| erulabs wrote:
| > Nothing can make nothing
|
| Is the implication that technology (like blockchain and
| digital currencies) and financial operations (like
| brokerages and exchanges) can create no legitimate wealth?
| Because I might humbly suggest this forum, which is run by
| a venture capital firm specializing in technology, might
| not _rush_ to agree with you.
|
| Less humbly, if you're suggesting labor is what makes
| things valuable, that's possibly one of the worst ideas in
| the history of economic thought. SBF might be a fraud, but
| it doesn't implicate cryptocurrencies, much less
| capitalism.
| randyrand wrote:
| > nothing can make nothing
|
| You can make money just buy buying money.
|
| There are billionaires in currency arbitrage.
| moab wrote:
| I mean, that's what I'm wondering about his parents. They
| must have known, or at least had a feeling. And not looking
| into that and giving your child some advice not to go down
| this path, or to be careful, and at the very least, not to
| get involved yourself, that would have been the responsible
| thing. Maybe it's the blindness we can all fall prey to
| when it comes to objectively thinking about our blood.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Defrauding willfully ignorant people is still fraud and
| still a crime. You shouldn't be excused for doing bad
| things by doing them to people who aren't the brightest or
| best.
| pastor_bob wrote:
| They're free to let him take a plea deal and go to prison
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| As a parent it does not work that way unless you have a toxic
| relationship with yours.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Bullshit. You are perfectly capable of letting your
| children be punished for their negligence or stupidity, and
| any action to lessen that punishment will just show them
| how far you are willing to sacrifice your own life to keep
| them from learning a hard lesson.
|
| They know he knowingly defrauded millions of people out of
| billions of dollars. If I did that, my mom would let me go
| to prison for the rest of my life because she knows she
| taught me morals and that human beings are more important
| than money and if I decide to ignore that moral framework
| as an adult then that's on me. Dude is an adult with a
| fully formed brain. Stopping a twelve year old from burning
| themselves on a hot stove is one thing, but if your fully
| adult son still needs to told not to touch the hot stove,
| it's time to let them fuck around and find out themselves.
|
| That all assumes they had no idea what was going on, which
| I don't know is believable.
| virgildotcodes wrote:
| Eh, this is probably their last chance to spend a
| significant amount of time with their son. By the time he
| gets out of prison they'll likely be dead.
|
| I can totally understand how parents wouldn't give two
| shits about "teaching their child a lesson" in this
| scenario.
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| I disagree. Especially when your child is all grown up:
|
| - You can balance their welfare vs. other goods, e.g.
| justice, well-functioning society, etc.
|
| - Your view of their welfare can include their character,
| maturity, empathy, and taking responsibility for their
| actions. It sucks if that requires 20 years in prison, but
| that may be preferable to helping them be a free but
| terrible person for the rest of their life.
| crabkin wrote:
| you're right. When going against the feds you are taking a
| huge risk trying to go to trial or otherwise fighting them.
| From their personal financial perspective and more likely
| also in their interest as SBF's parents, they'd be best
| served with taking the plea deal SBF is offered.
| [deleted]
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| If they can afford a _$250 million_ bond, they can probably
| afford the lawyer fees.
| jamesgreenleaf wrote:
| > The bond was secured by equity in his family home, and by the
| signatures of his parents and two other individuals with
| "considerable" assets.
|
| Who are these unnamed individuals, and what is their interest in
| this?
| [deleted]
| bandyaboot wrote:
| I'm not sure why that would matter. I would think all that
| would matter is having people willing to be on the hook if he
| skips town.
| hanoz wrote:
| It would matter if they were willing to lose the money to
| avoid a trial, for starters.
| ars wrote:
| There would still be a trial, even if he's not there.
| bandyaboot wrote:
| Fair point. Any idea if judges typically consider such
| things in this kind of case?
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Bonds agencies do. The term is "flight risk".
|
| <https://www.allcitybailbonds.com/2015/10/what-makes-
| someone-...>
|
| A 2007 NYT article describes particulars within the
| context of one case. In part:
|
| _To hear Ms. Weinstock tell it, Ms. Chanla was the
| ultimate flight risk. She was foreign born, and lacked
| ties to New York. She swapped identities like a
| chameleon, using at least two different names, the
| prosecutor said._
|
| _A week ago, detectives with a New York arrest warrant
| knocked on the door of "her Los Angeles home," the
| prosecutor said, and found her parents, who "claimed they
| had no way of getting in touch with her."_
|
| <https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/nyregion/04bail.html>
|
| SBF is an American citizen with two parents in high-
| reputation, reasonably high-profile professional
| positions (at Stanford University), by contrast.
|
| (I've no opinion one way or the other whether or not he
| should be free on bail.)
| smileysteve wrote:
| It matters if the people putting forward that cash were
| compensated by the scheme; Ie, if his paying bond (and
| potentially skipping town) is performed in a way to reduce
| compensation to the fraud/bankruptcy claimants.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-22 23:01 UTC)