Nobody Cares about Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX

[Innula Zenovka]

2 of them spent ordering and then eating lunch (I assume).

The fastest verdict I recall involved a jury taking roughly 40 minutes to determine that the defendant's possession of child sexual abuse material was illegal, despite his reliance on an unsupported disclaimer asserting "All models are 18 or over: proof held on file."

Juries hate looking at the evidence in cases like this, and so do judges, which means any defence strategy that forces them to is doomed from the start.

ETA: The test in English law is whether the jury can be sure that the model is not, or may not be, aged 18 or over. So, to put it another way, to vote to convict, the juror's reaction has to be something like "No way are they anything like 18!"

 

[Veritable Quandry]

I sat on a jury that took 12 hours on a single charge of receiving stolen property valued at under $1500.

 

[Free]

I sat on a jury that took 12 hours on a single charge of receiving stolen property valued at under $1500.

Did they at least feed you?

 

[Veritable Quandry]

Did they at least feed you?

No. It was over three days.

 

[Noodles]

2 of them spent ordering and then eating lunch (I assume).

10 minutes in: "So, we all agree he is guilty?"

Juror #7: "Well, maybe, but I was promised lunch, and a friend of mine said they get food from a really good caterer, so maybe we can pretend to discus this for an hour until lunch time, because I was looking forward to trying the chicken sandwich."

Other jurors all discussing to eachother asynconously: "Agreed "

Jury foreman: "Well than, lets round table about something fun we have done over the summer for a bit shall we?"

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

https://www.theonion.com/report-here-s-sam-bankman-fried-s-stupid-little-face-a-1850990520

 

[detrius]

 

[Free]

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

I mean.... fuck that guy. He's a douche, but 100 years is much harsher than most people get for violent crimes. Seems a bit warped... I guess stealing from rich people is seen as more evil in our legal system than some much more unspeakable things.

 

[Beebo Brink]

I mean.... fuck that guy. He's a douche, but 100 years is much harsher than most people get for violent crimes. Seems a bit warped... I guess stealing from rich people is seen as more evil in our legal system than some much more unspeakable things.

Violent crimes are disproportionately committed by poor people against a few individuals. White collar crime is "cleaner" but the financial damage it wreaks is also a form of violence and it hits a much larger group of people than a mugging. Think about the difference between being beaten up and thousands of people losing their life's savings. Yeah, you don't lose any blood or have to heal from bruises and broken bones, but on the other hand you feel the effects of white collar crime for the rest of your life.

I'm sick of it, frankly. Lock him up.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

American prison sentences are something of an outlier. In the UK, which has considerably more severe sentences than the rest of Europe, a whole life sentence without the possibility of release -- which 100 years must amount to -- is reserved for the most aggravated forms of murder (serial killers, terrorists, and the like).

The maximum sentence for fraud in the UK is 10 years (theft is 7 years). The idea of a whole life order for anything other than murder seems to me grotesque.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

Violent crimes are disproportionately committed by poor people against a few individuals. White collar crime is "cleaner" but the financial damage it wreaks is also a form of violence and it hits a much larger group of people than a mugging. Think about the difference between being beaten up and thousands of people losing their life's savings. Yeah, you don't lose any blood or have to heal from bruises and broken bones, but on the other hand you feel the effects of white collar crime for the rest of your life.

I'm sick of it, frankly. Lock him up.

I wasn't defending white collar crime relative to muggers. I'm curious about why you made that comparison. When I said "much more unspeakable things " I was certainly not thinking of muggings. I know of human trafficker's and sex slavers who got much lighter sentences. The point isn't to defend white collar crime, the point is American prison sentences sometimes seem random.

I can also think of a certain Stanford Swimmer who got 6 months...

American prison sentences are something of an outlier. In the UK, which has considerably more severe sentences than the rest of Europe, a whole life sentence without the possibility of release -- which 100 years must amount to -- is reserved for the most aggravated forms of murder (serial killers, terrorists, and the like).

The maximum sentence for fraud in the UK is 10 years (theft is 7 years). The idea of a whole life order for anything other than murder seems to me grotesque.

Agreed. American style justice often seems to be able to justify infinite punishment for crimes. We have punishment and not rehabilitation built into our culture. I think on average our system is too cold but as stated above, sometimes it's weirdly lenient.

 

[Beebo Brink]

The maximum sentence for fraud in the UK is 10 years (theft is 7 years). The idea of a whole life order for anything other than murder seems to me grotesque.

Well, it's an interesting exercise in value judgments and how they can be compared. Ten years for a $10 billion dollar crime -- one that devastated thousands of small crypto investors, not just banks -- seems ludicrous to me.

I would argue that the murder of an individual is horrible, certainly deserving of a significant sentence. However, there are other forms of violence which are not physical, and I believe we damage society by treating them as lesser crimes simply because the flesh of the victims remains unscathed.

The corruption of our financial systems -- scams, fraud, insider trading, etc. -- undermines the integrity of our financial system and of our society. White-collar crime is embedded in class systems that work to the advantage of those on top and perpetuate the perception (and the reality) of a fundamental unfairness. The effects are corrosive beyond our ability to measure, but in a less obvious way than someone who is bludgeoned to death.

 

[detrius]

Do you understand what I'm saying?"
shouted Moist. "You can't just go around killing people!"
"Why Not? You Do." The golem lowered his arm.
"What?" snapped Moist. "I do not! Who told you that?"
"I Worked It Out. You Have Killed Two Point Three Three Eight People," said the golem calmly.
"I have never laid a finger on anyone in my life, Mr Pump. I may be–– all the things you know I am, but I am not a killer! I have never so much as drawn a sword!"
"No, You Have Not. But You Have Stolen, Embezzled, Defrauded And Swindled Without Discrimination, Mr Lipvig. You Have Ruined Businesses And Destroyed Jobs. When Banks Fail, It Is Seldom Bankers Who Starve. Your Actions Have Taken Money From Those Who Had Little Enough To Begin With. In A Myriad Small Ways You Have Hastened The Deaths Of Many. You Do Not Know Them. You Did Not See Them Bleed. But You Snatched Bread From Their Mouths And Tore Clothes From Their Backs. For Sport, Mr Lipvig. For Sport. For The Joy Of The Game.

Terry Pratchett, "Going Postal"

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I wasn't defending white collar crime relative to muggers. I'm curious about why you made that comparison. When I said "much more unspeakable things " I was certainly not thinking of muggings. I know of human trafficker's and sex slavers who got much lighter sentences. The point isn't to defend white collar crime, the point is American prison sentences sometimes seem random.

I can also think of a certain Stanford Swimmer who got 6 months...

Well, it's an interesting exercise in value judgments and how they can be compared. Ten years for a $10 billion dollar crime -- one that devastated thousands of small crypto investors, not just banks -- seems ludicrous to me.

I would argue that the murder of an individual is horrible, certainly deserving of a significant sentence. However, there are other forms of violence which are not physical, and I believe we damage society by treating them as lesser crimes simply because the flesh of the victims remains unscathed.

The corruption of our financial systems -- scams, fraud, insider trading, etc. -- undermines the integrity of our financial system and of our society. White-collar crime is embedded in class systems that work to the advantage of those on top and perpetuate the perception (and the reality) of a fundamental unfairness. The effects are corrosive beyond our ability to measure, but in a less obvious way than someone who is bludgeoned to death.

It depends what your starting point is for custodial sentences, I think. Over here, anything over 4 years would be considered a significant sentence for most offences.

It's also very difficult to compare sentences for completely different crimes. How much money should a fraud involve, for example, before it attracts the baseline sentence for rape without aggravating factors? To my mind, that's an unanswerable question.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

It depends what your starting point is for custodial sentences, I think. Over here, anything over 4 years would be considered a significant sentence for most offences.

It's also very difficult to compare sentences for completely different crimes. How much money should a fraud involve, for example, before it attracts the baseline sentence for rape without aggravating factors? To my mind, that's an unanswerable question.

You are absolutely right that sentencing is subjective. I certainly think even 1 year in prison is a lot longer than some give credit. To me, punishment is useless. I wish our system was more concerned with rehabilitation. And when that isn't possible, humanly contain people who are too dangerous.

 

[Beebo Brink]

How much money should a fraud involve, for example, before it attracts the baseline sentence for rape without aggravating factors? To my mind, that's an unanswerable question.

And yet it's a question that judges must answer all time. It may be a subjective matter, but at some point in the judicial process, someone has to make a decision and pass a sentence.

Consider that at one time rape was viewed as less serious if the woman was not beaten up, wounded or killed. Our cultural views on that issue have changed in the last few decades, although not nearly enough. I'd love for white-collar crime to get a similar re-think for the long-lasting emotional damage on its victims, as well as the corrosive effect on our society.

To me, punishment is useless. I wish our system was more concerned with rehabilitation. And when that isn't possible, humanly contain people who are too dangerous.

I also would favor a completely different system than the one we've got now, which appears ineffective as a deterrent and is brutal to inmates. A combination of rehabilitation and restitution might be more just to everyone involved -- both to victims and perpetrators -- but the resources that would require put it out of reach. At least we no longer imprison debtors.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

And yet it's a question that judges must answer all time. It may be a subjective matter, but at some point in the judicial process, someone has to make a decision and pass a sentence.

No, they don't. In the UK, and (as I understand it, at least in the US federal courts) they have to consider how the specific aggravating and mitigating factors of the case before them -- rape or fraud -- compares with those identified by the sentencing guidelines for that particular type of offence. How the eventual sentence compares what might have been imposed for a completely different offence doesn't enter into it.

Consider that at one time rape was viewed as less serious if the woman was not beaten up, wounded or killed. Our cultural views on that issue have changed in the last few decades, although not nearly enough. I'd love for white-collar crime to get a similar re-think for the long-lasting emotional damage on its victims, as well as the corrosive effect on our society.

I don't know about "less serious" but in the UK "Violence or threats of violence (beyond that which is inherent in the offence)" are an aggravating factor in sentencing for rape (see Rape – Sentencing (sentencingcouncil.org.uk)). That seems to me not unreasonable -- the fact that the woman was not beaten up doesn't mitigate the offence, but the fact that she was certainly aggravates it and pushes it into a higher sentencing bracket.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

In the UK, just as the defence can appeal against unduly harsh sentences, the prosecution can appeal against ones they consider unduly lenient. There's quite a high bar to this. The prosecution can't simply say that they think the sentence should be a year or so longer. They have to argue the sentencing court misapplied the sentencing guidelines in some way with no good reason. Certainly over here the rapist swimmer would have found himself back in court very quickly, as would that "morbidly rich" young man whose parents' wealth apparently excused his driving.

 

[Free]

Missed this last week: the prosecutors heard Bankman-Fried's cries for leniency...

Prosecutors seek from 40 to 50 years in prison for Sam Bankman-Fried for cryptocurrency fraud

Federal prosecutors are asking a New York judge to sentence FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried to between 40 and 50 years in prison for cryptocurrency crimes they described as a “historic fraud.”

apnews.com