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

Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

coindesk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 157 posts

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#141

Post by fanso99 »

maxbond wrote: post #135
fanso99 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are intentionally exaggerating this situation. People are calling for him to be jailed — a perfectly reasonable call.

Intentionally? Are you proposing I have some kind of agenda, or just that I'm being willful in some way? This is my honest read of the situation, you're welcome to disagree. I have no agenda, only an opinion.

Intentional in the sense that you understand that you are exaggerating and still repeatedly do it. No one is calling for him to be flogged or beheaded in front of the White House. Jailing a fugitive, a flight risk financial scammer is not unreasonable. He was extremely wealthy at one point and so there is a chance he has enough money stashed somewhere to make fleeing a possibility. In addition, defrauding thousands if not millions of people is a heinous crime, for which the perpetrator should not be given any easy treatment. When we ("the society") catch a serial killer, we agree that letting them go free on a negligible bail and an IOU note is not wise.

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#142

Post by georgeecollins »

itslennysfault wrote: post #48
georgeecollins wrote: post #6

For anyone who is not aware, in the US you sometimes have to put up bail money to get out of jail because you are a flight risk or there is a danger you will commit further crimes (assuming you are guilty which is at that point unproven). There are services that do this as a bond, called a bail bond. You typically don't put up the full amount, maybe 5-10%. The rest of the risk of you not showing up for your trial is…

It's different from state to state. In IL, for example, (until recently) someone awaiting trail would give the government 10% directly and the state would act as their own bondsman as bondsmen/bounty hunters are illegal. If they were deemed a low flight risk they could also be released on an "i-bond" aka "released on your own recognisance" meaning they're just trusting you to show up to trials. I said "until recently…

You are right, thanks for the better explanation.

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#143

Post by jfengel »

dragonwriter wrote: post #137
jfengel wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that they know that they cannot collect the full $250M in the event of default, is there a reason that they picked that number? If they had called it a billion or a trillion or a squillion, what would have been different? Or for that matter, if they had said that the penalty was $0, and that the securities and sureties were sufficient? Presumably, they'll never find out, so perhaps it's moot. But I feel like th…

> Given that they know that they cannot collect the full $250M in the event of default I would not assume they know that, or that that is true. In fact, I think there is plenty of reason to think that: (1) SBF has control of assets exceeding $250M (not untainted, and they would likely be subject to criminal forfeiture if he was convicted and they were identified, but in the case of flight...), and (2) He would not ne…

Thank you. I appreciate your help understanding.

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#144

Post by fanso99 »

maxbond wrote: post #74
fanso99 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are upset that he is getting special treatment. Again. He doesn't deserve it.

Is he getting special treatment or do people not have detailed knowledge of how the criminal justice system operates and so are objecting to any perceived leniency at every step?

No, probably just special treatment: https://twitter.com/whalechart/status/1606293657518080001

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#146

Post by rkagerer »

rkagerer wrote: post #145

Could someone explain what meaning that $250M figure has if everyone recognizes there is really only $4M or so securing his attendance?

And yes, I recognize there are other conditions to steer his compliance (house arrest, electronic monitoring, etc), but those would be in place regardless of the bond amount so I consider them independant of my question.

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#147

Post by greyw »

random314 wrote: post #85
purpleflame1257 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you are talking about Haber, you couldn't be more wrong. He was actually a German Jew (convert to Lutheranism) who was forced out of his position when then Nazis came to power than died en route to Mandatory Palestine in 1934. He discovered the Haber process around 1911, which was well before WWII and it was intended for fertilizer only. Eventually people realized that mass ammonia production was very helpfu…

Mandatory Palestine is a new term that has been invented post world war 2. Back then, it was simply a country called Palestine, as can be seen from passports issued in that era.

Like the Weimarer Republik (in reality still called Deutsches Reich in the republic's constitution). Nevertheless, it is useful to disguish historical periods of the country.

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#149

Post by kodah »

moralestapia wrote: post #122
kodah wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The court is not a creditor and your credit worthiness (thankfully for most folks) does not apply in court. The court is taking the promise of property (defined widely) should Sam fail to appear. This system, if the value is high enough, will keep him in the country to face justice. Phrased another way, we're about to find out if SBF is morally bankrupt enough to take away a huge portion of his parents assets as well…

>The court is not a creditor Never said it was and the whole point of this is not whether they put some collateral or not. The whole point is, how come a 250M bail can be secured with a 4M house? That is the whole thing that is driving everyone nuts. Divide by a thousand and you may be able to get a better graps of it. Imagine you have a bail set for 250k and you tell the judge, well I have this really shitty used ca…

$4K is a little different than $4M. I don't think "everyone" is going nuts over this. Just some subset of people.

It doesn't really look any different than normal bail. Maybe this is many people's first exposure to the concept of bail though. Bail is also not just a dollar amount, it's about convincing the judge you've put forward enough to motivate you to stay.

Re: Bankman-Fried's Shrinking ‘$250M Bond’

#150

Post by cageface »

plsbenice34 wrote: post #128
cageface wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in my circle the people screaming the loudest for his head are the same people that are adamantly opposed to any government regulation of crypto. I think they're just mad that SBF spoiled their get rich quick scheme.

He was pushing for absurd regulations himself, such as KYC for front-ends of decentralised exchanges, so it is no surprise that they weren't his fan. More importantly, people who are in those groups tend to be aware how much he stinks of government corruption given his family ties, religion etc. - so it has always been assumed that he will get unfair treatment - and now it is seemingly turning out to go as expected.…

How is it turning out as to be expected? He's being prosecuted and faces a very severe sentence if convicted.
Post reply on HN