Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 748 posts

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#521

Post by Animats »

jacquesm wrote: post #485
lr4444lr wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They watched their own flesh and blood son transition with breakneck speed from a high rolling billionaire who hobnobbed with society's elites to facing spending the best years of his life in prison, a disgrace to his family and their legacy. How do you think you'd cope with that psychological ordeal?

And quite probably are near the top of the clawback list if it turns out that any of the funds ended up with them. They have very good reasons to be distressed, their sons future behind bars is only one of the things they need to be worried about. Their whole world is crashing down around them, besides of course becoming persona non-grata to pretty much all of their friends and quite possibly family in case others go…

Oh, it's worse than that. There will at least be civil suits. Possibly criminal prosecution.[1]

NYT: "Mr. Bankman was deeply involved in FTX. In its early days, he helped the company recruit its first lawyers. Last year, he joined FTX staff in meetings on Capitol Hill and advised his son as Mr. Bankman-Fried prepared to testify to the House Financial Services Committee, a person familiar with the matter said. FTX employees occasionally consulted him on tax-related matters, the person said. Mr. Bankman visited the FTX offices in the Bahamas as often as once a month, a person who saw him there said. ... He and Ms. Fried stayed in a $16.4 million house in Old Fort Bay, a gated community in Nassau, the capital of the Bahamas; the couple’s names appear on real estate documents, according to Reuters, though Mr. Bankman-Fried has said the house was “intended to be the company’s property.”"

His class at Stanford has been cancelled.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/12/technology/sbf-parents-ft...

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#522

Post by bhouston »

kweingar wrote: post #471
Gustomaximus wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On this note I am curious if political organisations will be required to give back the donations he made. It seems the right thing if they were stolen funds. But being politicians I'm curious if it will be rules for thee and not for me.

I wonder if the charities will have to give back their funding.

Yes they will have to. It is stolen money.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#523

Post by SoftTalker »

soyiuz wrote: post #174

I've seen a bunch of his interviews now and his message is pretty controlled, actually. It all boils down to: (a) I don't know, wasn't aware, and (b) I messed up / lost focus. These appearances seem to play a therapeutic (instead of legal or financial) role for SBF (bad idea, obviously). Yesterday (12/12) he was still talking about returning in a "senior executive role" to help in the bankruptcy. He is also convinced…

Sounds like a sociopath.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#524

Post by sam345 »

panarky wrote: post #447
this_user wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have already looked into this, and the claims on FTX' debt were valued at 5c on the dollar. Alameda has burned through billions, and most of what was left were illiquid shitcoins and other worthless junk. Madoff, at least, was dealing with real assets.

> burned through billions If Alameda lost the billions, then who won the billions? Who was on the other side of those trades?

I'd be surprised if you could claw back actual trades on an open arms-length market assuming that's what the FTX exchange was. In Madoff's case, there were no trades at all. Madoff collected the money from his investors, generated fake statements showing inflated fake balances and profitable trades (that never actually occurred) and then selectively doled out limited cash redemptions until everyone demanded their money back at once and the whole thing came crashing down. In SBF's case, it looks like SBF took money from his customers, and then bought or sold crypto in arms-length transactions on an open exchange. If that's the case it's hard to see how they can get the money back from the other side of the trades where his counterparties were buying or selling on the market in good faith. I think the only hope is that if they can somehow get the assets from his affiliated entities and/or reclaim assets that SBF and/or his companies still have control over whether on the block chain or elsewhere.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#525

Post by roland35 »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #433
roland35 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still, HE WASN'T SUPPOSED TO LOAN THE CUSTOMER MONEY!! If he didn't know that than why was it in the terms of service that his company wrote?

Because he's stupid and didn't read anything the company's lawyers wrote. That's the whole defense. Saying he loaned money to another company because he didn't know any better works better as a stupidity defense to get a more lenient sentence than what coffeebeqn wrote.

I mean, it's not like this was some super fine print detail here though... It (we hold your money/crypto for you 1:1 isolated and separated) was basically the entire point of the product.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#526

Post by gammarator »

rurp wrote: post #292
coolspot wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being extraordinarily connected did help Epstein though: he only spent one month in jail.

Only when the deal flew under the radar. The prosecutors even kept his victims in the dark in order to get away with such a soft deal. Once Epstein and his crimes were splashed all over the news he was looking at a much worse outcome.

GP was making a dark joke.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#527

Post by jacquesm »

Animats wrote: post #521
jacquesm wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And quite probably are near the top of the clawback list if it turns out that any of the funds ended up with them. They have very good reasons to be distressed, their sons future behind bars is only one of the things they need to be worried about. Their whole world is crashing down around them, besides of course becoming persona non-grata to pretty much all of their friends and quite possibly family in case others go…

Oh, it's worse than that. There will at least be civil suits. Possibly criminal prosecution.[1] NYT: "Mr. Bankman was deeply involved in FTX. In its early days, he helped the company recruit its first lawyers. Last year, he joined FTX staff in meetings on Capitol Hill and advised his son as Mr. Bankman-Fried prepared to testify to the House Financial Services Committee, a person familiar with the matter said. FTX emp…

It appears that his goose is fried, not cooked. As a lawyer he really should have known better.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#528

Post by jacquesm »

coffeebeqn wrote: post #520
jacquesm wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this. Same for a16z, Softbank and all the others that jumped on the crypto bandwagon without doing their jobs as board members and during the run-up to the deal and after investing. Ironically, the VCs will position themselves as the victims.

Did anyone respect SoftBank even before this? Their claim to fame was the botched WeWork money hole and a few other insanely overpriced rounds on unscalable/unprofitable(even in theory) businesses.

It's a mark of something, but not of excellence.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#529

Post by HPMOR »

trident5000 wrote: post #418
lr4444lr wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They watched their own flesh and blood son transition with breakneck speed from a high rolling billionaire who hobnobbed with society's elites to facing spending the best years of his life in prison, a disgrace to his family and their legacy. How do you think you'd cope with that psychological ordeal?

Best years? More like all the years.

He should not go to prison for life. Nobody should ever go to prison for life, for wasting money. Money is literally made up. Sure, opportunity cost is real, but seriously nobody should ever lose their life for money.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#530

Post by SoftTalker »

batmenace wrote: post #33
masterof0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing how connected the guy is, I'm guessing he'll only serve a few years at most. I sincerely hope I'm mistaken.

Eh, it feels like he may have donated a lot, but he wasn't crazy popular. Plus, not like he's had a long track record of donations over many years. I am not sure anyone with much influence will stick their neck out for someone like him

Yep, once they realize more money won't be coming, past donations aren't worth much in the way of future favors.
Post reply on HN