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

Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 77 posts

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#21

Post by tdb7893 »

jmyeet wrote: post #7

Waste of time. Just buy a pardon [1][2][3][4][5]. [1]: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/05/04/donald-trumps- ... [2]: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/05/04/donald-trumps-... [3]: https://apnews.com/article/nikola-trevor-milton-fraud-trump-... [4]: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7e0jve875o [5]: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/28/trump-pardon-bitmex-crypto-e...

He was a top Democrat donor (the article says he was their number 2 individual donor in 2022) so I doubt he could buy one. Not that he seemed particularly left leaning himself and he also donated to Republicans but 5.2 million publicly to Biden seems like a dealbreaker.

https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donatio...

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#22

Post by Analemma_ »

Lerc wrote: post #8

> In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals. So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen fro…

You SBF defenders have such a weird view of how the law works. If I embezzle money from my company and then bet it all on black in Vegas, intending to give it back if I win, your implication here is equivalent to saying I did commit a crime if the wheel comes up red, but I did not commit any crime if it comes up black.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#23

Post by tsunamifury »

benzible wrote: post #11
Lerc wrote: post #8

> In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals. So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen fro…

That is not how any of this works. He was convicted of fraud, and fraud was committed the moment he transferred the funds to Alameda. That he placed some bets that worked out, like his Anthropic investment, doesn't negate the crime any more than if I robbed a bank, placed a winning bet with it and returned the funds with interest.

Except when you pay someone to manage your money.

Remember this.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#24

Post by rootsudo »

tdb7893 wrote: post #21
jmyeet wrote: post #7

Waste of time. Just buy a pardon [1][2][3][4][5]. [1]: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/05/04/donald-trumps- ... [2]: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/05/04/donald-trumps-... [3]: https://apnews.com/article/nikola-trevor-milton-fraud-trump-... [4]: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7e0jve875o [5]: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/28/trump-pardon-bitmex-crypto-e...

He was a top Democrat donor (the article says he was their number 2 individual donor in 2022) so I doubt he could buy one. Not that he seemed particularly left leaning himself and he also donated to Republicans but 5.2 million publicly to Biden seems like a dealbreaker. https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donatio...

And this is why you play both sides.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#25

Post by gcheong »

tsunamifury wrote: post #23
benzible wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not how any of this works. He was convicted of fraud, and fraud was committed the moment he transferred the funds to Alameda. That he placed some bets that worked out, like his Anthropic investment, doesn't negate the crime any more than if I robbed a bank, placed a winning bet with it and returned the funds with interest.

Except when you pay someone to manage your money. Remember this.

Clarify? I don't understand how whether or not I pay someone to manage my money makes a difference as to whether what they did was commit fraud. People paid Bernie Madoff to manage their money and early investors got promised returns but he still went to jail because he was running an illegal ponzi scheme.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#26

Post by root-parent »

benzible wrote: post #11
Lerc wrote: post #8

> In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals. So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen fro…

That is not how any of this works. He was convicted of fraud, and fraud was committed the moment he transferred the funds to Alameda. That he placed some bets that worked out, like his Anthropic investment, doesn't negate the crime any more than if I robbed a bank, placed a winning bet with it and returned the funds with interest.

Proof you can graduate from MIT and still be completely dumb.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#27

Post by Lerc »

benzible wrote: post #11
Lerc wrote: post #8

> In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals. So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen fro…

That is not how any of this works. He was convicted of fraud, and fraud was committed the moment he transferred the funds to Alameda. That he placed some bets that worked out, like his Anthropic investment, doesn't negate the crime any more than if I robbed a bank, placed a winning bet with it and returned the funds with interest.

I'm saying a Fraud conviction is not the same a stealing. I'm completely ok with a conviction for fraud, provided that the conviction and sentencing is based upon that fraud.

I would characterise robbing a bank, placing a bet and returning the funds as theft.

However if you entrusted me with $500 and I gambled and paid you back when you wanted the $500, I would not say that is theft. If I had promised not to gamble, then it would have been fraudulent.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#28

Post by nullc »

benzible wrote: post #11
Lerc wrote: post #8

> In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals. So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen fro…

That is not how any of this works. He was convicted of fraud, and fraud was committed the moment he transferred the funds to Alameda. That he placed some bets that worked out, like his Anthropic investment, doesn't negate the crime any more than if I robbed a bank, placed a winning bet with it and returned the funds with interest.

It's hardly even that-- he dumped the remaining customer assets to briefly crash the price of Bitcoin... causing an understatement in what he took from people.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#29

Post by Lerc »

Analemma_ wrote: post #22
Lerc wrote: post #8

> In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals. So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen fro…

You SBF defenders have such a weird view of how the law works. If I embezzle money from my company and then bet it all on black in Vegas, intending to give it back if I win, your implication here is equivalent to saying I did commit a crime if the wheel comes up red, but I did not commit any crime if it comes up black.

Not a SBF defender, and at no point am I suggesting that a crime was not committed. I am saying that the crime is different to theft.

Would you say that a misuse of funds with zero chance of the rightful owner losing their money is a less serious crime than a misuse of funds with a 50% or 100% chance of losing their money.

I think it is, and penalties should be proportionate. That is a principle that I hold independent to any of the specifics of this case.

Re: Sam Bankman-Fried loses bid to appeal against fraud conviction in FTX case

#30

Post by Lerc »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #20
Lerc wrote: post #8

> In appealing against the conviction, Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers argued that US district judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw the trial, improperly prevented Bankman-Fried from introducing evidence to back up his belief that FTX had enough funds to cover customer withdrawals. So it's been a few years now. Did people get their money in the end? That would presumably answer the question of whether they were stolen fro…

I think the victims were helped quite a bit by the runup in crypto assets. So even though some was lost, the run up in what was left ended up being quite a bit.

Yeah that happened with MtGox too. I don't think that aspect should be factored in as a defence. It should be more down to the degree of risk that people were exposed to at the time the offence occurred.
Post reply on HN