Sam Bankman-Fried Sentenced To 25 Years in Prison (washingtonpost.com) 143
Crypto entrepreneur Sam Bankman-Fried was sentenced Thursday to 25 years [non-paywalled link] in prison for a massive fraud that unraveled with the collapse of FTX, once one of the world's most popular platforms for exchanging digital currency. From a report: Bankman-Fried, 32, was convicted in November of fraud and conspiracy -- a dramatic fall from a crest of success. U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan imposed the sentence in the same Manhattan courtroom where, four months ago, Bankman-Fried testified that his intention had been to revolutionize the emerging cryptocurrency market with his innovative and altruistic ideas, not to steal.
Kaplan said the sentence reflected "that there is a risk that this man will be in position to do something very bad in the future. And it's not a trivial risk at all." He added that it was "for the purpose of disabling him to the extent that can appropriately be done for a significant period of time." Prior to sentencing, Bankman-Fried had said, "My useful life is probably over. It's been over for a while now, from before my arrest."
Kaplan said the sentence reflected "that there is a risk that this man will be in position to do something very bad in the future. And it's not a trivial risk at all." He added that it was "for the purpose of disabling him to the extent that can appropriately be done for a significant period of time." Prior to sentencing, Bankman-Fried had said, "My useful life is probably over. It's been over for a while now, from before my arrest."
Powerful democrats (Score:1, Insightful)
Guess this blows the theory he is(was) being protected by powerful democrats.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Powerful democrats (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Powerful democrats (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.dallasnews.com/opi... [dallasnews.com]
https://finance.yahoo.com/news... [yahoo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This is ironic because were it not for him, both sides of Congress would be deep red, and it would allow them to impeach and convict, with a 2/3 majority in the senate all Dems. SBF saved the Democratic party in 2022, and now he is going to pay in blood for doing so.
That's... an interesting fantasy you have going there. I'll lay odds you're trolling, but one can never tell these days. I'm invoking Poe's Law here.
The person that "saved" the Democrats was none other than Donald tRump due to his sabotaging the GOP. Or do you think that the fact that the GOP has underperformed in numerous elections across the country since 2018 is a coincidence? That 2022's supposed "red tsunami" turned out to be a wet fart where they barely took the House and lost ground in the Senate?
Re: Powerful democrats (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
we actually get the leaders we choose
Except that when Trump won in 2016, he had fewer overall votes than Clinton. If he wins in 2024, it will again be because of electoral college math rather than by winning the popular vote.
A tiny proportion of voters showed up for the Republican primaries, just 14% of Republican voters in Iowa, for example.
So we have a Republican candidate selected by a tiny fraction of the members of that party, who will lose the popular vote, who still has a very good chance of becoming president. That hardly seems like
Re: Powerful democrats (Score:2)
Re: Powerful democrats (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
-Abortion
-Marijuana
-Healthcare
To name a few...on all of those issues public polling shows popular opinion is in contrast to the current laws. It's no way to effectively govern.
Re: Powerful democrats (Score:2)
He saved them in 2016, when he switched parties and beat up the entire Republican line up; including Bush & Huckabee.
He saved them in 2018 when he clamped down the Republican Dynasties like Cheney, McCarthy, and McConnell.
He saved them in 2020 when he flipped GA, PA, MI, WI, and AZ.... mostly from getting Dems to vote in unprecedented numbers. He ousted McCarthy. He killed off a good number of Republican voters by telling them not to take COVID seriously.
He tried killing one of the most conservative R
Re: (Score:2)
Seems silly to believe that was his only wallet with crypto. One can pretty much guarantee he has others he'll tap when he gets out of prison.
Big Assumption (Score:2)
One can pretty much guarantee he has others he'll tap when he gets out of prison.
That assumes that crypto will be worth anything in 25 years time. At some point, people are going to wake up and smell the tulips.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
"We'll see if he "kills himself in prison at the same time the cameras malfunction". He lost access to all those funds so he isn't able to make protection payments or party donations."
Some of you people need serious psychiatric help.
Re: (Score:3)
> Some of you people need serious psychiatric help.
Am I missing something? You act like that isn't a narrative we were sold once already.
Jeffrey Epstein: Jail CCTV erased by 'technical errors'
https://www.bbc.com/news/world... [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Several of the cameras were still working. Not a very effective conspiracy.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard rumors of Epstein Suicide Truthers but I always thought they were like Santa Clause or the Tooth Fairy. Are you going on record as saying Jeffrey Epstein killed himself?
Re: (Score:2)
Do I think the medical examiner and all the other investigators are right and he killed himself, or do I believe in a vast, shadowy conspiracy requiring all those parties plus the prison guards, plus whoever controlled access to the federal prison building to function? A conspiracy whose goals seem to silence him, with the assumption that he had something juicy on powerful people, something that wasn't kept in with the other blackmail materials that law enforcement actually had possession of, and something
Re: (Score:2)
I guess CBS and 60 minutes are in on the conspiracy too.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j... [cbsnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh do they have proof that he was killed?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh do you have proof he killed himself? Some sort of video since he was under 24/7 surveillance...
Re: (Score:2)
In pondering what would be an appropriate sentence, how do you rehabilitate a 57 year old in 2049 back into civilization? His parents will be well into their 80s, he won't have any friends and at that age no one will hire him even at Starbucks. (sure ---- him but assuming he doesn't have millions stashed in a vault, he becomes a burden on social security)
I understand the anger - the scale of his theft is unfathomable but to me it speaks of a failure of regulation.
How does an American citizen relocate a bus
don't drop the soap! (Score:2)
don't drop the soap!
Re: (Score:3)
Re:don't drop the soap! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
He'll get time off for good behavior. He'll end up locked up for 85% of the sentence, unless he gets caught doing something else he's not supposed to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Rich person jail is different from poor person jail. Like Jordan Belfort, the Wolf Of Wall Street writer. He committed hundreds of millions of dollars of fraud. His cell mate was Tommy Chong. He served a few years and still hasn't fully repaid his restitution. He wrote a best selling book and does speaking engagements. White collar crime is the only way to go.
Re:don't drop the soap! (Score:5, Informative)
Let's try to be real here. This dude is not getting laid again until after most of his hormones are gone. He won't have a drink of anything other than prison hooch for many years. He won't have hands on a computer more or less until he gets out.
While it isn't as bad as the common inmate who gets solitary for getting in a scuffle, it's nothing you or I would want. This is going to suck for him.
Re: (Score:1)
I bet a condition of his release is he can never touch a computer again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By the time he gets released computers will be touching us.
Re: (Score:2)
I bet a condition of his release is he can never touch a computer again.
That's irrelevant: his talent was as a con-man, not as a techie - he acknowledged more than once that he can't write code.
It's both gross and terrifying (Score:5, Insightful)
You won't find anyone supporting state sanctioned rape & beating around here, but you'll find no shortage of people A-OK with looking the other way while it happens. While they know it happens. Gleefully.
Re: (Score:2)
My girlfriend did a 10 year stretch in prison before it was overturned on appeal. I'm highly conscious of prison abuses. She works now as a prison reform lobbyist.
The upshot is that nothing is going to change until you stop imprisoning people. They'll still be cruel to each other, and if you choose to put everyone in solitary, it's even worse. We're social animals.
The two Roman choices seem far more equitable. Fine for lesser offenses or death for capital offenses, and both avoidable by choosing exile
Re: (Score:2)
Not a problem. We'll just execute every criminal so there won't be a need for jails in the strict sense. They'll just be holding places until the execution takes place.
Once they're dead a criminal can't criminal again.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with death as a punishment is when you are wrong, the only solution is "oops".
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why, if there is any doubt, the person doesn't get executed. If it's found the prosecutor or a witness or someone else involved lied, withheld evidence, or anything similar, they get executed.
The person who was framed gets paid by their estates and the government along with a complete expungement of their record.
Re: (Score:3)
If it's found the prosecutor or a witness or someone else involved lied, withheld evidence, or anything similar, they get executed.
Life in prison would be fine. It's probably a good thing we don't have the death penalty here.
George Dangerfield holds the unfortunate title of being the Crown prosecutor responsible for the most wrongful convictions in Canada. Four that have been proven include Thomas Sophonow, James Driskell, Kyle Unger and Frank Ostrowski, and two more, Brian Anderson and Allan Woodhouse, await a decision from the Minister of Justice.
https://www.innocencecanada.co... [innocencecanada.com]
And it is actually six now. So far.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh please, the vast vast major of people who believe in punitive rather than rehabilitative sentencing also believe orderly safely run facilities.
Unless they also believe in - and support - funding them adequately to pay for the human oversight required for "orderly safely run" facilities (e.g. "higher taxes"), them saying that's what they want has little meaning.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's try to be real here. This dude is not getting laid again until after most of his hormones are gone. He won't have a drink of anything other than prison hooch..
If he was semi-smart, then he has hidden millions or billions to pay off anyone while in prison, and the interest he’ll earn after 25 years will buy him plenty of whores and Viagra vape pens in 2049.
Re: (Score:3)
If he was semi-smart he would have walked down to the harbour, paid cash for a berth on a cargo ship to Panama and then disappeared.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah this guy totally swayed the election...
Computer access (Score:2)
Nothing by our standards, but one thing the BOP does right is electronic messaging kiosks. Google Corrlinks, I think it is. Plain text and limited length, billed per minute.
Re: don't drop the soap! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Useful life? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd argue he never had a useful life. He'll be in prison because his life until now has been damaging to society. Sad to see he still doesn't get that. Hope he stays there for a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
All things considered, I'd say "since before I was conceived" would be even more accurate. He is what his parents raised him to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Useful life (Score:5, Insightful)
Useful life, was that the part where he embezzled billions? Because I'm not sure that's something most people would call useful.
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't say who it was useful to, after all. It was certainly useful to himself, and to anyone he donated to.
Re: (Score:2)
Useful life, was that the part where he embezzled billions? Because I'm not sure that's something most people would call useful.
Tell that to a multi-millionaire banker or politician. I’m certain they will believe they lead a “useful” life. So will their children benefiting from them.
Harsh sentencing (Score:1)
I don't want to excuse what he did, given the big numbers, but 25 years is pretty harsh. It's just money and 25 years is going to be no more a deterrent than 15, IMHO. But there will be parole and he's quite young and healthy.
Re:Harsh sentencing (Score:4, Informative)
There is no parole in the federal system. He can get a 54 day per year reduction in the sentence for good behavior, that's about it.
I'm sure his lawyers will be trying the appeals process over and over, but he's pretty much in jail for slightly over 20 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is there no parole in the federal system? That's horrific!
Re: (Score:2)
Start here. [nolo.com]
If you want commentary, it was the time of the great wave of street crime in the US. The lawmakers of the time wanted to 'do something' about it. The logic of the time said that stiff mandatory sentences would deter crime and/or at least get people off the street. Of course, the great result is really captured well in Paul Graham's chart. [twitter.com] Bad policy takes on a life of its own.
Re: (Score:3)
The largest fraud in history is a pretty harsh crime. Sentences are as much about punishment as deterrence.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems to me a lot of people "forget" about the punishment side of justice. If justice isn't seen to be done then it eventually loses its purpose and ends up being held in contempt by the public.
Re: (Score:3)
Some are actively opposed to punishing crime. And deterring it, for that matter.
Re: (Score:3)
"It's just money"
If I have worked my entire life for a savings and invest it, and you take that money maliciously (as he did), you're robbing me.
Money is the way we measure our time value. $20 to one person is worth something different than $20 to another person, so a theft of $20 is different. It may be life impacting.
It's analogous to fractional slavery, honestly - you're depriving someone of the proceeds of their labor, depriving them of their autonomy.
Death would have been appropriate, if you consider t
Re: (Score:2)
So how much money is equal to a rape, for you?
Re: (Score:2)
Is rape worth more or less than life?
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/23... [npr.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Congress eliminated parole for defendants convicted of federal crimes committed after November 1, 1987. Going forward, these offenders receive a period of "supervised release" to be served at the end of the federal prison sentence.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/is-federal-parole-system.html [nolo.com]
Re:Harsh sentencing (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just money
Spoken like someone who has never not had money. The money I've managed to save up is "just" my retirement. If that disappears I'd "just" be relegated to working until I'm dead. Yeah, fuck that sociopath. He can rot in prison.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never had money, dude. You are the one speaking like it's all that matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Never said that's all that matters, but it's pretty difficult to actually live without it, isn't it? It's not "just money" when your scraping enough together to put a couple gallons of gas in your car. It's "just money" when spending $10k on some frivolous garbage doesn't even raise your blood pressure. Big difference.
Whatever, though. Point still stands: SBF is a sociopath that I can't muster a shred of empathy for.
Re: (Score:2)
I said you act like money matters above actions, not that you "said" it. That's certainly the tone you gave.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You already said that!
Parole (Score:2)
Re:Parole (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Even that is only if the prisoner can avoid chickenshit or dishonest disciplinary actions.
Re: (Score:2)
Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Congress eliminated parole for defendants convicted of federal crimes committed after November 1, 1987. Going forward, these offenders receive a period of "supervised release" to be served at the end of the federal prison sentence.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/is-federal-parole-system.html [nolo.com]
Good riddance (Score:2)
He should have been locked up for longer given the fraud he perpetrated. But he is right about one thing: his useful life is likely over. However, it would be interesting to see what he tries to do once he's released. I probably won't live to see it but perhaps I'll be proved wrong.
life over (Score:5, Interesting)
Not too long ago, I had someone in the Men's room ask me how to flush the urinal. The urinal had an auto-flush mechanism, all he had to do was walk away. He said he had just been released from 25 years in prison. He had never seen a toilet that could flush itself. He said that he had not seen all of the technology and felt lost coming back into society. This is SBF's future.
Re: (Score:3)
There are bigger issues. People getting out of Rip van Winkle sentences don't know how you apply for a job now. We need much better re-entry preparation.
Re: (Score:2)
He asked a question. I told him to just walk away. He decided to explain himself, I didn't ask. I suppose I was the only person around and he had been there before me, I think he was honestly trying to figure it out. Dude was clueless about basic things in modern life.
Re: (Score:2)
they have had self flush toilets since the mid 80's, even the holiday inn in our po-dunk middle of nowhere town had them when I was a kid, and im 45 now
Oh dear (Score:2)
Seems the "i'm a poor little aspie and didn't understand the effect my actions would have on people" excuse didn't work for this guy. Such a shame. /sarcasm
Satoshi enabled so many criminals (Score:1)
Re:Bad justification for sentencing (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's fair if, during the trial, it's evident that the accused has no remorse or understanding that they did anything wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's fair if, during the trial, it's evident that the accused has no remorse or understanding that they did anything wrong.
Or he's just looked at the other things wealthy people regularly get away with and thought to himself "By that standard, how bad can I possibly be?" His mistake was that he scammed rich people. If he'd stuck to more socially acceptable ways of exploitation, such as payday loans, dietary supplements, or owning a fossil fuel company, he'd still be a free man.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Thank god he didn't do something really bad, like sell $20 worth of cannabis. https://www.nola.com/news/cour... [nola.com]
Re:Bad justification for sentencing (Score:5, Interesting)
He showed absolutely no remorse for stealing people's money to enrich himself. That definitely should figure into sentencing because it specifically points towards if he would repeat the offense or not.
If he actually understands the damage he caused and internalized how it was unacceptable, that's one thing. But he hasn't. He would make that exact same decision again, because the only remorse he's feeling is wishing he didn't get caught.
Fuck that guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Bad justification for sentencing (Score:4, Insightful)
One of the purposes of jail is to put dangerous people away so they can't do more damage.
I think it's clear that he has done a lot of damage and shown no remorse (he still thinks he didn't do anything wrong).
25 years is a good amount of time for him to think about what he did and possibly change his mind so that he won't do it again.
Re: (Score:2)
but I really think that future behavior should never be a justification for harsh sentencing
What you are talking about is foundational to the entire concept of imprisonment. Judges literally have always imposed sentences based on perception of future actions. It's why everyone (who isn't a sociopath or narcissist) is always so clear about how remorseful they are or how they've seen the error of their ways, or why something was a once off. It's why someone who has been in prison for stealing, gets a harsher sentence if they are in front of a judge for stealing again.
The point of prison is not punis
Re:Unpopular opinion (Score:5, Interesting)
The only people we should be locking up are people who we as a society can't prevent from committing more crimes and hurting more people.
I don't know if you paid attention to the trial, but based on his behavior I'd say there is no way to prevent SBF from committing more crimes. Even when under house detention he resorted to witness intimidation. His brainstorming [binance.com] definitely moved in the direction of committing more fraud, spreading falsehoods, and basically doing anything ethically-questionable to help himself.
The studies about the deterrent power of prison actually focus on crime in general -- normal inmates in there for robbery, selling drugs, etc etc. Studies that focus on fraud [theguardian.com] find that it has a significant deterrent effect. Especially when you come from the American blue-blood class SBF did, where going from the top .1% to the bottom 1% (incarcerated) is absolutely unfathomable. This is a guy who's never had to do his own dishes or clean his own house reduced to a 20-cent an hour prison job. That would definitely deter any other would-be crypto CEOs (who enjoy the life of .1%) from similarly messing with customer funds, now they know that they'll end up with a long prison sentence and not a slap-on-the-wrist.
Two to five years in prison to potentially make (and hide) millions and millions of dollars might be worth it to many people [Martin Shrkeli, Charlie Shrem anyone?], but I doubt any amount of money is worth the entire prime of your life (30's, 40's, 50's) being spent in prison.
Re: (Score:2)
His brainstorming [binance.com] definitely moved in the direction of committing more fraud, spreading falsehoods, and basically doing anything ethically-questionable to help himself.
From that piece, this says a lot about US society:
"3) Go on Tucker Carlson, come out as a republican. "
One more thing (Score:2)
Sure there were small investors that didn't know and got fleeced, but nobody cares about them. Again, Madoff ran his scam for decades and nobody cared until some 1%ers got ripped off.
We could *easily* pass a bunch of new regulations that would protect both the small and
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You literally just put him on parole (Score:5, Interesting)
And then you have the parole officer at bar him from taking any job where he has any authority to make decisions. At the absolute worst he'd be able to embezzle a few thousand dollars from a mega corporation before getting caught.
There is no parole in the federal system, so that wouldn't be legally possible. Even if it was, based on his behavior evading restrictions on house arrest using VPNs etc to communicate, it will be no time before he figures out how to get back on the crypto markets with an pseudonym. Unfortunately, even when under bail (stricter than parole), people have figured out how to keep hacking [gamespot.com] while under supervision. So it's just not technically possible to keep this dude from running rampant with a computer outside of a prison environment.
I think he would've ended up with a 5-10 year sentence maximum if he hadn't engaged in this troubling pattern of behavior post-arrest, it just wreaks of malicious intent.
It's always worth it to take that kind of risk because you're talking about the difference between having an ordinary or maybe even a absolutely crappy life and the difference between living like a god king.
Not for SBF actually and that was my point about the .1%. SBF never had a risk of having an "ordinary" life by any standards. He grew up in a $4MM house on the Stanford campus with elite professors as parents, went Ivy League, etc etc. The worst that could've happened to him is that he went from being the .1% to maybe the 1%-2%, far from ordinary. Those are the people that need to be deterred, and I think showing them their entire "useful life" could be spent in prison rather than them living as single-digit millionaires is a strong enough to deter the upper-class.
Re: (Score:2)
No parole, but a common thing in Federal is to follow a prison sentence with a term of "supervised release", which has key features in common with parole. If that was included in the SBF sentence, he'd have a badly limited life.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And don't tell me it's a deterrent.
How can we ever know? There are probably people right now on the edge of committing crimes who'd rather avoid jail.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)