Judge Signals Jail Time if Bankman-Fried's Internet Access Is Not Curbed (nytimes.com) 66
Sarah Blesener writes via The New York Times: Since his arrest two months ago, Samuel Bankman-Fried, the disgraced cryptocurrency executive, has been physically confined to the Palo Alto home of his parents, under the force of a $250 million bail package. But he has roamed largely unfettered in the wilderness of the internet: conducting interviews, posting narratives, making calls on encrypted apps and using a virtual private network, a web tool that allows users to conceal data and visit websites without detection. Those unrestrained days may soon be over. On Thursday, a federal judge overseeing Mr. Bankman-Fried's multibillion-dollar fraud case signaled a willingness to jail him for his persistent testing of his confinement's boundaries, going beyond what prosecutors had asked. "Why am I being asked to turn him loose in this garden of electronic devices?" the judge, Lewis A. Kaplan, asked prosecutors, describing the well-wired home of Mr. Bankman-Fried's parents, both professors at Stanford Law School.
No new conditions were set during Thursday's hearing, the latest of several hearings, held in federal court in Manhattan, to consider more restrictive bail terms. Judge Kaplan asked both sides to prepare concrete proposals that would limit and monitor Mr. Bankman-Fried's access to the internet without inhibiting his ability to participate in his defense. Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have charged Mr. Bankman-Fried with orchestrating widespread fraud at FTX, the cryptocurrency exchange he founded, accusing him of misappropriating billions of dollars of customers' money. Prosecutors said he used the funds to finance lavish real estate purchases, political contributions and investments in other companies. After he was charged in December, Mr. Bankman-Fried was released on bail with the requirement that he wear an ankle monitor and stay confined to his parents' house. [...]
No new conditions were set during Thursday's hearing, the latest of several hearings, held in federal court in Manhattan, to consider more restrictive bail terms. Judge Kaplan asked both sides to prepare concrete proposals that would limit and monitor Mr. Bankman-Fried's access to the internet without inhibiting his ability to participate in his defense. Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have charged Mr. Bankman-Fried with orchestrating widespread fraud at FTX, the cryptocurrency exchange he founded, accusing him of misappropriating billions of dollars of customers' money. Prosecutors said he used the funds to finance lavish real estate purchases, political contributions and investments in other companies. After he was charged in December, Mr. Bankman-Fried was released on bail with the requirement that he wear an ankle monitor and stay confined to his parents' house. [...]
Shame (Score:2)
He certainly can be a bit long-winded and snarky at times, but I'm gonna really miss his YouTube Channel [youtube.com] after they cut him off.
(Okay, I know explaining it ruins the joke, but Samuel Bankman-Fried is like the Technology Connections guy's doppelgänger)
Re:Shame (Score:5, Interesting)
He certainly can be a bit long-winded and snarky at times, but I'm gonna really miss his YouTube Channel [youtube.com] after they cut him off.
(Okay, I know explaining it ruins the joke, but Samuel Bankman-Fried is like the Technology Connections guy's doppelgänger)
With that fixed grin, he reminds me of Jim Carrey's 'Mask'. Except not so well dressed.
He's just really really creepy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:VPN (Score:5, Insightful)
The entire point of a VPN is to obscure the content of the communications from 3rd parties.
Re: (Score:3)
Correct. But, by design, the goal is not to obscure/hide the traffic. The goal is to SECURE the traffic.
Re: VPN (Score:2)
More precisely, to provide integrity and confidentiality.
Re: (Score:2)
The EXISTANCE of the traffic, no, it can't hide that. But it CAN hide where you are browsing (assuming your VPN includes your DNS) and WHO you are communicating with, in addition to the actual content of the browsing and communications.
level 1: are you doing something? If so, how often, and when?
level 2: who are you doing that something with, and where are they?
level 3: what are the exact details of what you are doing?
vpn can block access at levels 2 and 3, but not 1. I was interpreting your response to
Re:VPN (Score:4, Informative)
You can use it to obscure 1, if you send random traffic any time you aren't using it. For instance, constantly stream video over a VPN, and they'll have a hard time determining when you are engaged in a text chat with someone.
I don't know whether anyone has set it up, but I can imaging a VPN that sends and receives, say, 1000 1500 byte packets per second regardless of what data the user might be sending or receiving, just to obscure the users actual activity.
Re: (Score:3)
Only if you think that VPNs are exclusively used for web browsing. There are many other applications where security is the dominant factor
Re:VPN (Score:5, Insightful)
Home confinement pre-trial is getting a bit outdated since you can still commit so many crimes while never leaving your bedroom now. Anyone on bail for any crime involving electronic theft, fraud, internet scams, sending orders to people via email, etc. should not be allowed internet access.
ESPECIALLY with a defendant as utterly stupid and naive as this guy.
Re: (Score:1)
ESPECIALLY with a defendant as utterly stupid and naive as this guy.
With the amount of fucking around he's done, I'm AMAZED that the judge hasn't already moved SBF to the "Find Out" part of the sequence...
Re: (Score:3)
Him and his parents are rich, else he would have his bail revoked already.
Re: (Score:2)
Was he a billionaire? I mean with actual money, not cryptocoins. And you can be smart in one thing while utterly stupid in another. The stupid part is that he keeps opening his mouth and every time he does so he hurts his own legal case. He appears to not really understand just how deeply in trouble he is, or that the criminal case can be won with PR.. Even if true, he's losing the PR case as well.
Charges DO stick on rich people. It happens all the time. The DA just needs to stick with it. Ie, mob bo
Re:VPN (Score:4, Interesting)
Well the purpose isn't supposed to be to prevent you from committing crimes or having enjoyment. The purpose is supposed to be to prevent you from fleeing... someone who is pre-trial hasn't been convicted of any crimes and may never be.
Re: VPN (Score:3)
Re: VPN (Score:2)
Re:VPN (Score:5, Insightful)
The purpose of the possible restrictions is to prevent (or at least curtail) Bankman-Fried's attempt to engage in witness tampering. He has already, in poorly coded communications that a toddler could read between the lines of, attempted to engage in witness tampering. The judge's concern here appears to be in the interest of seeing that justice is served by allowing the jury to hear from witnesses who have not been illegally coached or who have conspired with Bankman-Fried to lie.
Bail, which isn't really the issue here, is actually is intended to achieve two goals. The first is to insure that defendant appears for court. The second is to prevent the defendant from posing a danger to the public.
Re: (Score:2)
Part of the purpose of pre-trial detention is absolutely to prevent the commission of more crimes. This is why in olden times charged suspects who are considered dangers to the community can be ordered to be held without bail.
Re: (Score:2)
Giving interviews and being visible online, the stated cause of concern, is not criminal activity. If the prosecutor can issue press statements and leak yet more to the press to influence public sentiment and therefore the potential jury pool against him then he can certainly do the same in turn... in fact he could do so even if the prosecution couldn't. The default is always in favor of the accused. American justice is built on the notion that it is better for many guilty men to get away than to imprison a
Re: (Score:2)
Evidence? Sure, he traded with himself to jack up the price, but was that being smart? Not smart enough to realize it was illegal. He's clearly showing a lack of intelligence ever since he has gotten into trouble; he continually admits to crimes thinking that if he just talks enough the legal system will forgive him.
Re: VPN (Score:3)
Galaxy brain (Score:2, Interesting)
These galaxy-brained Gods of the Universe really don't seem to understand that the law does apply to them, and if they continue to defy judges bad things can happen. This one might serve as an example to others - but I doubt it.
Curbed (Score:1)
Want to curb his internet access? Just force him to switch to Comcast. More like "Con-cast", am I rite!?
Re: Curbed (Score:1)
Too funny!
Exinternetunication? (Score:2)
Will we someday have a punishment that is cutting someone off from the internet? For a period of a few months, years, life, a convict will be denied participation in the hive mind. They will be restricted to a Nokia dumbphone, prohibited from subscribing to an ISP, unable to get HBO Max. Relegated to basic cable without the possibility of a DSL. Only able to have a library card that does not have the public terminal password. Left out, memeless, coinless, tweetless, can't join a Fortnite, err whatever it is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There was also an episode of Black Mirror where the Prime Minister fucked a pig on live TV.
That was probably a reference to Cameron. [wikipedia.org]
You missed out by not watching the rest of the series.
Re: (Score:2)
How the series received approval to be made following that episode, I'll never know.
As the whoever57 pointed out, that part was more or less a documentary about English life and so was kind of needed even though it's a bit of a disgusting idea. I'm sorry non-Brits have to deal with it but any case to shut this down would have involved too many embarrassing stories about English judges being brought into evidence and so could not possibly be allowed to proceed.
Please do watch the rest of the series. There's nothing that's the same kind of problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably that episode should have been 4th or 5th in the series. I don't know why people were so aghast at it - nothing was shown. The whole theme of the episode was more about how the media consuming public were glued to their screens.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why people were so aghast at it - nothing was shown.
The entire idea of the English upper classes is entirely disgusting. You try to put it out of your mind as a 19th century anachronism but then you realise that, although he was from illegitimate lines, Boris Johnson was right in there, including being a Bullingdon Club member. I could really see this becoming far to real for some people.
Re: (Score:3)
When you're on bail you're not supposed to have access to the same tools of crime that allegedly got you into trouble in the first place. The legal system is behind the times here and home confinement with an ankle bracelet doesn't cut it anymore.
even inmates get TV so can't can't cut that off (Score:2)
even inmates get TV so can't can't cut that off. And if they do some lifers may just riot.
Re: (Score:2)
The point here isn't to be a punishment. The point is to allow some freedom while on bail while not allowing wholesale continuation of the very crimes you were arrested for. A mob boss out on bail isn't allowed to have guns, the pedo on bail isn't allowed to visit the local schools, etc. So someone committing an internet based scam should not have unsupervised access to the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Dade Murphy... I hereby fine your family $45000, and sentence you to probation, under which you are forbidden to own or operate a computer or touch tone telephone, until the day of your 18th birthday
Re: Exinternetunication? (Score:1)
Seems easy enough (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No. What you do is revoke bail and toss him in a cell until his trial. Bankman-Fried is an adult. So unless the parents are deputized LEOs; his adherence, or lack thereof, to his bail conditions is none of their business or responsibility.
Re: (Score:2)
Turd (Score:2)
disgraced cryptocurrency executive
I think you mean "thief who stole billions of dollars".
Compare this to how a poor person who has been accused of stealing something far less valuable would be treated. Our "justice" system is a joke. It's this kind of horse-shittery that drives folks towards right-wing authoritarianism.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
A Turd Weasel Douche Nozzle with Billions of bucks to gamble at the crypto casino because its never enough.
He is trying to be Leonardo DiCaprio in the Wolf of Wall Street, having outgrown Scrooge McDuck finally. It is interesting to see how when excessive wealth and privilege lose their luster, greed springs eternal. It fans the flames of greed for wealthy marks. Like Madoff, its easy to raise money when you're swimming in it.. The grifter models how wealth is wagered
WHY???!!! (Score:1)
The purpose of pre-trial confinement is NOT punishment, silencing, enjoyment reduction, etc. The purpose is to make sure he sticks around pending a trial at which he MIGHT be convicted of crimes.
This action on the part of the judge seems highly prejudicial as if he is dealing with someone he has already determined is guilty and shouldn't be enjoying access to the wonders of technology pending 'making it official.' Sounds like a good basis for an appeal.
To prevent possible coverups and possible further (Score:1)
To prevent possible coverups and possible further crimes.
Re: (Score:2)
These are not things the government is supposed to be doing to all of its citizens.
1) Citizens don't belong to governments, governments belong to citizens
2) SBF is not all citizens
Re: To prevent possible coverups and possible furt (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I generally agree but its not just about ensuring the accused appears. There are some additional consideration like possible witness or evidence tampering, seeking to bias the jury pool that justify courts placing pretrial restrictions on defendants.
Both the court and society has an interest in that. We address the defendants interests by providing a right to a speedy trial. You can only be held either on bail or in lock for a limited time.
his parents' house?? (Score:2)
Also: I suppose VPN's won't cut it. He's just have to use TOR instead. I'm sure this judge understands all the technical details of that tech, too.
Innocent until proven guilty? (Score:2)
The point of bail is to prevent the suspect from fleeing. It has nothing to do with punishing them before they are found guilty. Even if Sam looks as guilty as heck, the judge should know better.
He is innocent until proven guilty (Score:2)