FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried was sent to jail Friday to await trial after a bail hearing for the fallen cryptocurrency wiz left a judge convinced that he had repeatedly tried to influence witnesses against him.
Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.
Isn’t he just so nice?!
He is the nicest billionaire.
If there was an electric chair he would be Fried Bankman-Fried
he’s certainly never going to be Freed Bankman-Fried
And if he’d worked for a bank he’d be fried bank man Bankman-fried
I love how delusional this company is thinking they’re going to open back up for business like anyone would trust them ever again.
They were running a ~$50 billion company on quickbooks (!) without a single actual accountant on board.
The CEO brought in to manage the sinking ship said they were “grossly inexperienced and unsophisticated individuals who failed to implement virtually any of the systems or controls that are necessary for a company…”
This is the same CEO that managed the Enron debacle, mind you.
So, I’m starting to think these FTX folks are not exactly smart reasonable people.
Are his parents going to lose their house now?
No. Bail is collateral if a person fails to appear. Bail term revocation and bail bond forfeiture are entirely different things.
The New York government [pdf warning] says [emphasis added]:
While the case is open, the defendant must obey all court orders and attend all
scheduled court appearances. If not, the court may revoke bail, which means the
bond is forfeited and you lose your collateral.He wasn’t charged by NY state. The southern district of NY(SDNY) is a federal court. In federal court:
When a defendant’s bail is revoked for failing to appear or violating a bail condition, any money put up for bond can be forfeited.
Though they can both happen for the same reasons, they are separate things, and one doesn’t happen automatically because of the other.
In this case:
His bail was revoked. His bail was not forfeited.
I don’t think in any state bail revocation makes bail forfeiture automatic. They’re separate actions.
The court would make two separate rulings:
The defendants bail terms are revoked.
The defendant’s bail shall be forfeited.
And the headline would read Bankman bail revoked and forfeited
Thank you for the clarification: I appreciate it, and I leave a more knowledgeable person than I was before!
Good natured discussion is contagious. Thank you for being so chill.
I should have mentioned this too::
To be fair, this statement I made incorrect in a way:
No. Bail is collateral if a person fails to appear.
It’s loosely (or more so) implies something that is somewhat incorrect. In a way, implies that bail is only for collateral. And that’s not true either. As you mentioned. The fact that bail can be forfeited for numerous things all lends a secondary purpose of insuring that not only they appear, but also comply with other terms of their bail.
I didn’t mean to imply that was it’s only purpose. I meant to imply it was the primarily purpose, but most importantly I meant to make a distinction between revocation and forfeiture.
Finally. Took long enough.
If there"s one thing I love but am perpetually frustrated by, it’s how slow the US legal system is. Yes, “finally.” OTOH, citizens have rights and one of them is innocence until guilt is judged, and also that we try really hard to not let the general public, under the influence of the 5th Estate, be that judge. It’s super frustrating when it’s obvious to me that the person is guilty. It can also be extremely unbalanced, with people whe can afford better council getting better benefits-of-a-doubt than the poor. But in general, we have a pretty good system which - if I were ever caught in - has protections I’d be grateful for.
For what it’s worth, a lot of times the reason why these trials take so long is because they are trying to build an airtight case. Kind of the same reason why sometimes you see obvious murderers being treated “well” like that shitstain kid who shot up a school a few years back. They want to make sure there’s no bias, no mistreatment, no cause for mistrial etc. It’s frustrating but I guess I get it.
Disclaimer, I’m not a lawyer
I meant finally in that it’s been pretty obvious that he’s been engaging in witness tampering, and they’re finally throwing it at him on that alone. I understand the initial house arrest terms and such as reasonable as long as he didn’t do anything obviously illegal before trial, but it took too long for them to call him on these tampering charges. His FAFO should have happened sooner.
Good. Scum like him deserve to rot behind bars.
Five new felony charges too! You love to see it
He should have been in jail the whole time.
HOW LONG HOW LONG
