Sam Bankman-Fried is guilty, and the industry he helped build wants to move on
NPR - https://tinyurl.com/yyu2n9uc
NPR - https://tinyurl.com/yyu2n9uc
SBF jailed
- Thread starter Pekelo
- Start date
The list of "services" would be "interesting".
With no access to crypto, disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried is now trading fish to pay for services in prison
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/no-access-crypto-disgraced-ftx-164722170.html
With no access to crypto, disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried is now trading fish to pay for services in prison
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/no-access-crypto-disgraced-ftx-164722170.html
If you wondered how he looks in jail:
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://i.redd.it/ocmmxhn9kojc1.jpeg
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://i.redd.it/ocmmxhn9kojc1.jpeg
News: Prosecution recommends 40-50 years...
Interesting opinion from reddit:
"There is an interesting point of law here that the prosecution argues in their sentencing memo - namely that there are two legal principles at play, actual loss and intended loss. They contend (probably correctly) that Sam is guilty of both. More in that in a minute.
The other contention, which the Defense didn't address in their memo, is that the losses to investors and lenders is at least $3 billion. That's over the Sentencing Guidelines max (which adds 30 points to the calculation for loss over $550 million). Add in the base offense (6) plus some of the other special offense characteristics (number of victims, role in the fraud, obstruction, etc) which take him to the max level easily (43 points). So the customers aren't necessary to get him the max point level. But they probably count too:
According to the law, there are only two reasons to make credits against a loss: funds are returned before the fraud was discovered or if they received collateral. Neither of these is true (no funds have been returned to date, and it will be well after the fraud is discovered). They also use Madoff to refute the citation of Durham. Which, ouch, Madoff received a sentence of 150 years. You don't want his name mentioned anywhere in your Sentencing, and especially not refuting a claim you made.
As to intended loss, the Prosecution contends that this applies, because at the time of bankruptcy SBF himself disclosed the $8 billion hole.
Basically, he's screwed. The only real debate here, I think, is whether the Judge will stack the counts or not. In the vast majority of cases, they don't. In that case he'd probably get somewhere around 20 years. But there is precedent to stack counts and get to a longer sentence (Prosecution is recommending 50 years) here. Lot's of things working against him - loss amount, pre-trial detention for witness intimidation. The only things working for him are his age, first time offender, and victims will likely see substantial reimbursement (for the customers, at least)"
More interesting discussion:
Interesting opinion from reddit:
"There is an interesting point of law here that the prosecution argues in their sentencing memo - namely that there are two legal principles at play, actual loss and intended loss. They contend (probably correctly) that Sam is guilty of both. More in that in a minute.
The other contention, which the Defense didn't address in their memo, is that the losses to investors and lenders is at least $3 billion. That's over the Sentencing Guidelines max (which adds 30 points to the calculation for loss over $550 million). Add in the base offense (6) plus some of the other special offense characteristics (number of victims, role in the fraud, obstruction, etc) which take him to the max level easily (43 points). So the customers aren't necessary to get him the max point level. But they probably count too:
According to the law, there are only two reasons to make credits against a loss: funds are returned before the fraud was discovered or if they received collateral. Neither of these is true (no funds have been returned to date, and it will be well after the fraud is discovered). They also use Madoff to refute the citation of Durham. Which, ouch, Madoff received a sentence of 150 years. You don't want his name mentioned anywhere in your Sentencing, and especially not refuting a claim you made.
As to intended loss, the Prosecution contends that this applies, because at the time of bankruptcy SBF himself disclosed the $8 billion hole.
Basically, he's screwed. The only real debate here, I think, is whether the Judge will stack the counts or not. In the vast majority of cases, they don't. In that case he'd probably get somewhere around 20 years. But there is precedent to stack counts and get to a longer sentence (Prosecution is recommending 50 years) here. Lot's of things working against him - loss amount, pre-trial detention for witness intimidation. The only things working for him are his age, first time offender, and victims will likely see substantial reimbursement (for the customers, at least)"
More interesting discussion:
Last edited:
I forget which case it is that I read about just the other day, but the compensation offered when they mention close to 100% reimbursement is the value of the holdings at the time of collapse. So if you had one Bitcoin that at the time was 20K, you are getting back 20K USD and not 1 Bitcoin. I can't imagine most people will be happy about this supposed 100% recovery rate.
Exactly true, when part of the reason Bitcoin dumped was because of FTX.
If it were up to me i would send him to the electric chair. A lot of people investing in Bitcoin are newcomers to the market and invest with everything they got...
The 100% recovery rate is bullshit. They invested a bunch of money into crypto start ups, and we know how those went. Now if they had let's say 50% left in BTC and BTC doubled since, then in theory they could give it back in dirty fiat, but as the previous poster said, they count the loss in BTC, not in cash.
Shkreli's clients actually made a profit, yet it doesn't change the fact that he misappropriated their investment first, and made the profit later.
If you steal 100 bucks and take it to the casino and double it, then give the 100 bucks back, you are still a thief.
Shkreli's clients actually made a profit, yet it doesn't change the fact that he misappropriated their investment first, and made the profit later.
If you steal 100 bucks and take it to the casino and double it, then give the 100 bucks back, you are still a thief.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-the-ways-sbf-sucks-in-detailed-court-filing/
The stakeholders should be jailed too:
"While Ray's team continues to work to recover funds lost, which has been estimated around $10 billion, the total amount of stakeholder claims filed is $23.6 quintillion dollars.
"One quintillion is one billion billions," Ray told Kaplan. "It is the number 1 followed by 18 zeros."
That is called filing a false claim...
The stakeholders should be jailed too:
"While Ray's team continues to work to recover funds lost, which has been estimated around $10 billion, the total amount of stakeholder claims filed is $23.6 quintillion dollars.
"One quintillion is one billion billions," Ray told Kaplan. "It is the number 1 followed by 18 zeros."
That is called filing a false claim...
So... about the CEO of... you know, Alameda, where it all happened. What happens to her? (shocker I know)
The media doesn't talk about her evading the FBI and fleeing... and then getting tracked down by her cell phone and busted by swat agents. So... ahem... about her not helping authorities in trying to help the clients (which is documented)... what's the punishment?
....
The media doesn't talk about her evading the FBI and fleeing... and then getting tracked down by her cell phone and busted by swat agents. So... ahem... about her not helping authorities in trying to help the clients (which is documented)... what's the punishment?
....
Nothing, since she helped the FBI bring the real criminal who hired her, to justice.