The language here is confusing as hell. Typically, personal recognizance means your word. Is this some special combination of your word and your parent's house? ATTTORNEYs please enlighten us.

I'm struggling with how SBF received a $250M personal recognizance bond in the first place, that his parents came pledged their equity interest of their home which cant be close to even $50M and how the math of this bond works. On the other hand, the MSN article above states that SBF doesn't have to meet the full collateral requirements of the bond. So apparently, this is effectively not a $250M Bond or Saul's Bail Bonds made some pretty good money this morning.

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:
Wang and Ellison plead guilty to fraud and are cooperating.

https://mol.im/a/11564593

{deleted}

Note to Joe Biden: As you can see above, I cant figure out the math of SBF's $250M Bond. I assume the reason is because I graduated from a State College as University's were out of my budget and I knew I had to pay for my tuition. Now I'm suffering to make sense of this bond and University graduates probably understand the math of this bond. Upshot: Please don't enact the $10-20K student loan thingy as it just rubs salt into the wound. Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
One thing we learned today that I don't think was known before is that the Wang and Ellison plea deals were inked in January.

Where did you see this?

The final plea deal document is draft dated last week (12/14/22) and signed a few days ago (12/19/22):
https://s3.documentcloud.org/d...ress-on-the-case.pdf

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
One thing we learned today that I don't think was known before is that the Wang and Ellison plea deals were inked in January.

Where did you see this?

Looks like there was a mistake in the press release from the US Attorney.

It has since been amended to read "December 19, 2022" instead of January 19, 2022


[IMG:left] [/IMG]

Today's WSJ has a link to both plea deals and they appear to have been signed on December 19th by each defendant and the AUSA.

Yep, with the actual deal document available at the link in my previous post dated 12/19, that appears to just be a mistake in a press release rushed out the day before the Christmas Eve holiday. I mean, I guarantee that right about everyone who's working in an office today is just phoning it in anyway.

(Or was it... *dun dun DUNNNNNNNN* *thunder crashing*)

I bet that PR guy is kicking himself. It will certainly give the tin foilers and clickbait media plenty to run with.

"Deep State Hides Plea Deal Protecting Democrat Donors For 11 Months; Intense Coverup Underway After Accidental Revelation!"

"Feds Aware Of Pending Crypto Ponzi Implosion One Year Beforehand; Biden Admin Forces Modification Of Press Release!"

"Elvis And Tupac Seen Signing Plea Deal Alongside Caroline Ellison In Photo Dated January 19th, 2022!"

So he pledged a 250mm bond with ostensibly stolen cash? Even if he found a bondsman he still needed 25mm. I’m a bit incredulous.

I am no expert but here is what I think about the bail.

"A recognizance bond is a written commitment from the accused to appear in court when ordered. In return, Bankman-Fried’s camp will not be required to meet the full collateral requirements on the bail."

Typically one would have to put up 10% of the bail amount - $25 million

but because SBF had a clean record and agreed to extradition, and his parents were such models of society, their written commitment meant they did not need the full collateral requirements. (? 25 mil)

So the court accepted the parents equity interest in their home as collateral (probably something significantly less than 25 mil)

My opinion is that this is not a wise decision by the judge.

Why give him the slightest credit for agreeing to extradition ? He was in a Bahamas hell hole of a prison and was denied bail there. That is why he agreed to come to the U.S. And there are reports that this U.S. bail arrangement had been negotiated before he agreed to extradition.

The case against SBF is strong. He knows that. He could certainly be facing decades in prison. If he finds a way to disappear do you really think he will worry about the financial ruin of his parents ?

I saw a tweet that baqil bonds in NY cost 6% of the headline figure for amounts over 10k. So 6% would be 15 mil

As noted earlier he is no Houdini. Disappearing requires a requisite sort of skills he does not possess. Plus the Feds do not like folks to jump bail. It is fairly lenient having him able to travel Northern California and NY. His parents do not look the type to assist him in jumping bail. The prospect of surrendering your home at their age is not a pleasant thought. Stanford will also find a way to part ways with them regardless of how this turns out.

When is a $250M Bond not a $250M Bond? When it's not.

Unless Saul showed up with $25M and provided the court with a $250M bond then it's basically a personal recognizance Bond with a property pledge (his parents have a $5M home in Palo Alto) as well as, some investments and savings amounts attached to it that don't come close to $250M. Something doesn't smell right unless there is a hidden benefactor that also co-signed the Bond we just don't know about yet.

Must be nice to be so well connected. If it were a most beloved local figure, that person would never live outside of prison again.

I hope Stupid Boy Fraudster does something stupid, violating his bond, and is remanded into custody until his trial.

I also hope he has the goods on others of higher statute (e.g., son of “the big guy”), rats them out, and the cryptocookie crumbles.

I’ll submit a bit of tin foil hattery, although it’s really based more on an extreme mistrust of the system at large and democRATs in general.

This little turd not only stole mountains if other peoples money, but made donations (ie gifts of cash) to said democRATs. We already know the Just-us department is highly compromised- who’s to say he won’t somehow “slip away” and prove he’s the criminal mastermind genius everyone says he is not? Yes, it’s a huge leap of conjecture but I do not trust anyone in the system to which he gifted other peoples money; only Soros donated more to these cretin. If he is able to “somehow” dip on his surveillance and his family lost their estate, would it matter if a lot of that stolen money ended up in their pockets as compensation off the books?

I know it’s a convoluted stretch, but I do NOT trust the left not to do the above.

…Crumples foil hat, tosses into the can…

There is so much visibility on this that all of the dems who received illegally gotten funds via campaign contributions will give the money back and disavow any knowledge that the money wasn't "clean". I doubt there will be any evidence that anyone knowingly accepted contributions they had any reason to know were fraudulent. Yeah a few druggie kids in the Bahamas that dress like slobs do not seem to be the type to successfully run a company and make that kind of money, so "they should have known", but that's not a legal argument.

SB-Fraud will plead guilty or be convicted in court because everyone will testify against him. About all he has is "I didn't know what they were doing at Alameda", and I don't think that argument is really credible. He's not going to be saved or be allowed to go on the lam.

From the earlier article, Alameda traded heavily in the SBX Token to prop the price up. And they probably did a ton of trading on margin. With the broad decline in crypto prices of all kinds, they got squeezed, unable to cover all their bets and diverted customer funds from SBX to Alameda to prevent immediately collapse, figuring they would "make it up" when crypto prices recovered.

From what I read, Wang wrote code at Alameda to prevent automatic sales of positions that fall below a threshold ("stop loss" I think it's called), and opened up a back door to get limitless funds from SBX.

Basically, Alameda's trading losses siphoned everything out of SBX until there was nothing left. Sure, a fair amount of money appears to have been misappropriated, and without good accounting records it will be hard to figure out how much. But with civil suits, investors and creditors will get everything that these 3 (and potentially more) cannot keep hidden.

This isn't that different than a hedge fund that makes a huge bet that goes wrong - or Wall Street betting on sub-prime mortgage backed securities with AIAG insurance policies to "eliminate" the risk - and losing their shirts when the market drops and there isn't nearly enough money to pay the insurance claims. If it drops enough you won't have enough cash to cover obligations, and the devalued investments are not worth nearly enough to secure new lines of credit. Normally this ends in Bankruptcy like Lehman Brothers in 2008. Now imagine if Lehman covered their losses by draining customer accounts from the brokerage until everything was gone and you have SBX.

Of course, Lehman didn't do this and brokerage customers were able to move their funds to another brokerage. SEC regulations ensure this (more or less), and the people in charge at Lehman knew a bankruptcy is way better than going to jail for a long time.

Sam Bankman-Fried’s ex Caroline Ellison faced 110 years in jail before plea

Disgraced FTX crypto mogul Sam Bankman-Fried’s ex-girlfriend Caroline Ellison was facing up to 110 years in prison before she agreed to cooperate with the federal government, her plea agreement shows.

The former Alameda hedge fund CEO, 28, pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges in an agreement signed on Monday.

“The total maximum sentence of incarceration on Counts One through Seven of the Information is 110 years’ imprisonment,” the document filed by the US attorney for the Southern District of New York read.

The agreement also indicates that Ellison and FTX co-founder Gary Wang had agreed to “cooperate fully” with the feds, in exchange for which they will likely get much lighter sentences.

Crypto exchange FTX collapsed in November after federal investigators say Bankman-Fried used investors’ money to fund the Alameda hedge fund and by summer this year Alameda owed FTX’s customers approximately $8 billion.

For her part in the scheme, the hefty charges Ellison was slapped with included wire fraud, commodities fraud, secutities fraud and money laundering.

However, in exchange for Ellison’s decision to “truthfully and completely disclose all information concerning all matters” in the investigation, prosecutors agree to release the Stanford-educated math whiz on $250,000 bail. Provided she sticks to her promise to cooperate with the feds, she will be sentenced at a later date.

The bail sum is 1,000 times less than that of her former paramour, Bankman-Fried, who is holed up at his parents’ Palo Alto home with an ankle monitor after being released on a record-breaking $250 million bail bond following his extradition from the Bahamas.

As part of her plea, Ellison, a Massachusetts native whose parents both teach at MIT, is also not allowed to travel outside the continental United States, and was made to surrender her travel documents to law enforcement.

The plea agreement shows Ellison is still on the line for financial damages and has also been separately sued by the federal government.

Earlier this week, legal experts told The Post why they felt Ellison would turn on Bankman-Fried.

“Almost invariably, people say, ‘At the end of the day, I have to look out for my interest or my family’s interest. Even if I don’t relish what I’m being asked to do,’” said Jack Sharman, a white-collar criminal defense attorney for Lightfoot, Franklin and White.

“[Ellison and Wang] will undermine likely many of [Bankman-Fried’s] defenses or arguments that they were in charge or were doing things without his knowledge,” added Michael Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor and white-collar defense attorney at Cole Schotz.

Since the FTX scandal imploded in November, Ellison has given up her jet-setting lifestyle hopping between the company’s ultra-luxe Bahamas penthouse and Hong Kong and has maintained a low profile. She has only been spotted once, grabbing coffee in New York City on Dec. 4.

https://nypost.com/2022/12/23/...nd-bars-before-plea/

The bail is more like a personal recog bond with his parents house. Prosecution just making it look big.

Then don't call it a $250M Bond because it's not unless they make public fully aware of how it was funded to $250M. For example, if you have a $250K bail like the other two defendants, you cough up either the full amount (your cash, etc) or a you pay a bail bondsman $25k to post your bond. For most people, seeing a bail amount is what you post before you bond out. Not a Fake Bail amount of $250M that the media just want to hype but no one can see how you got to that number. In other words, is it really a $50M Bond with a $250M Bond liability? IMHO, $250M Bond and Personal Recognizance don't belong in the same sentence. Having said that, I could be totally wrong. Perhaps bail reform in NY state is such that he really never needed to fund a $250M Bond upfront.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
They discussed it last night on Fox news.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicolas Roos called Mr. Bankman-Fried’s alleged crimes “a fraud of epic proportions” and said he believed the $250 million bond was the largest ever. The judge said the bond would be cosigned by four financially responsible people, including one nonfamily member.
LINK: WSJ https://www.wsj.com/articles/s...6?mod=article_inline

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ZSMICHAEL,

Apparently, ole Sammy flew home to Kalifornia in Business Class on American Airlines after enjoying the the AA Business Class Lounge at the airport. I think Business Class on AA is the revised First Class section but I could be wrong, again.