Sam Bankman-Fried has been released on bail

[franky1]

I generally support bail, given that people shouldn't be imprisoned before they are convicted, and given that the sum is pretty big (so I don't think he'll run).

for non physical harm charges i agree, but with not locking some one up for month pre-trial. however there needs to be stiff conditions. such as the ankle monitor, a curfew, limitation of distance/time from home. surrendering passport etc.

But substance abuse and mental health treatment? If these are requirements for bail, might it mean Bankman-Fried's defence strategy is to prove that he, suffering from addiction and mental health issues, wasn't quite capable of recognizing his actions (regarding FTX) and thus isn't liable for criminal responsibility? IMO, that's the most interesting part in this news. I don't think such treatment is a standard bail requirement, so it might shed light on how the trial will play out.

he actually does have a drug problem he couldnt even last 10 minutes in a court room without asking the court to go to the bathroom to apply his 'high' inducing emsom patch to stop the shakes and withdrawals

as for trying the insanity defence you presume he will try,

having the cognative ability to plan to wear his courtroom suit when being arrested so he can avoid appearing in a jumpsuit in court, and having a prescription medicine 'legal high' set up to allow him to continue getting high, shows he is not insane.

insanity defence only works when the crime is a short event like a spur of the moment unplanned couple minute murder. it doesnt work when it was a year long+ planned fraud.

[AmoreJaz]

I generally support bail, given that people shouldn't be imprisoned before they are convicted, and given that the sum is pretty big (so I don't think he'll run).

for non physical harm charges i agree, but with not locking some one up for month pre-trial. however there needs to be stiff conditions. such as the ankle monitor, a curfew, limitation of distance/time from home. surrendering passport etc.

But substance abuse and mental health treatment? If these are requirements for bail, might it mean Bankman-Fried's defence strategy is to prove that he, suffering from addiction and mental health issues, wasn't quite capable of recognizing his actions (regarding FTX) and thus isn't liable for criminal responsibility? IMO, that's the most interesting part in this news. I don't think such treatment is a standard bail requirement, so it might shed light on how the trial will play out.

he actually does have a drug problem he couldnt even last 10 minutes in a court room without asking the court to go to the bathroom to apply his 'high' inducing emsom patch to stop the shakes and withdrawals

as for trying the insanity defence you presume he will try,
that only works when its s short event like a couple minute murder. it doesnt work when it was a year long+ fraud

i believe it is part of the deal that he surrendered his passport. but of course, with money you can very well get out of the country if you want to. but i don't think he will do such escape as it is his parents' home at stake. i can agree that he may have drug problem issues.. great that he has parents to rely on to this matter.  don't know yet where this is heading to. but this will be a long process of hearings and can they still recover some funds to allocate to his clients' losses?

[pawel7777]

my view is

eg
customer PoR: (audit A)
customer balance total      500k coin
customer reserve address  500k coin
value ($) at audit : $8.25bill
...

If it's an exchange you're talking about, you have to consider that some portion of the coins held at the customers' reserve address would belong to the exchange (i.e. in relation to exchange fees and/or other charges). Those cannot be completely separated. And that's not really a problem, customers' funds would be recognised as both assets and liabilities on the company's balance sheet (see a snippet of the Coinbase BS as an example) and any competent auditor should be able pick up any deficits.

[Kryptowerk]

Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried has been released on bail after appearing in U.S. federal court in New York on Thursday. Bankman-Fried was told he can live with his parents on $250 million bail secured in part by their Palo Alto, California, house. His release also includes a long list of requirements for him to remain free while he faces charges. He's not allowed to make financial transactions of more than $1,000, can't open new lines of credit, can't leave the house except to exercise and must go through substance abuse and mental health treatment, according to the agreement.

More @ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/12/23/first-mover-americas-sec-scrutnizes-crypto-audits-sbf-gets-bail/

Yes, it's disgusting to see that money can buy you (temporary?) freedom - even in a very clear case of extreme fraud like in this situation.
However, as much as I despise SBF and his atrocious way of trying to weasel out of any responsibility (did you listen to Coffeezilla interviews of him? - hilarious!) let's not forget one important thing:
For this FTX + Alemeda mega-scam to become as big as it did and run as long as it did, we need A LOT of people to look the other way (or be actively involved), while things were already running in a *more than shady* way.
Sure, everyone wants a scapegoat, and probably SBF deserves a massive sentence - however I fear most of the other people that enabled this thing in the first place will not receive similar justice.

[Gyfts]

Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried has been released on bail after appearing in U.S. federal court in New York on Thursday. Bankman-Fried was told he can live with his parents on $250 million bail secured in part by their Palo Alto, California, house. His release also includes a long list of requirements for him to remain free while he faces charges. He's not allowed to make financial transactions of more than $1,000, can't open new lines of credit, can't leave the house except to exercise and must go through substance abuse and mental health treatment, according to the agreement.

More @ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/12/23/first-mover-americas-sec-scrutnizes-crypto-audits-sbf-gets-bail/

He claimed in an interview that he had less than $100,000, so how can he afford to pay the $250,000,000 bond?

His parents posted the bond and used property as collateral. It's not clear to me whether the entirety of 250M needed to be produced in order for SBF to be released, but it's odd how his parents assets aren't being investigated. If it's true that FTX funneled money to SBF's parents, then the feds will seize his parents assets and potentially find them criminally liable as a result. If the funds are seized, the bail should be nullified because the collateral isn't actually under their ownership. These trials will take a while to be prosecuted. Could be years while he's out on bail.

Had SBF had 250M, the feds will have seized it all. So he most likely kept all of his wealth in off shore accounts or in other people's name. Of course, he undoubtedly has probably millions of dollars worth of crypto assets the government is unaware of.

[Yaunfitda]

Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried has been released on bail after appearing in U.S. federal court in New York on Thursday. Bankman-Fried was told he can live with his parents on $250 million bail secured in part by their Palo Alto, California, house. His release also includes a long list of requirements for him to remain free while he faces charges. He's not allowed to make financial transactions of more than $1,000, can't open new lines of credit, can't leave the house except to exercise and must go through substance abuse and mental health treatment, according to the agreement.

More @ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/12/23/first-mover-americas-sec-scrutnizes-crypto-audits-sbf-gets-bail/

Yes, it's disgusting to see that money can buy you (temporary?) freedom - even in a very clear case of extreme fraud like in this situation.
However, as much as I despise SBF and his atrocious way of trying to weasel out of any responsibility (did you listen to Coffeezilla interviews of him? - hilarious!) let's not forget one important thing:
For this FTX + Alemeda mega-scam to become as big as it did and run as long as it did, we need A LOT of people to look the other way (or be actively involved), while things were already running in a *more than shady* way.
Sure, everyone wants a scapegoat, and probably SBF deserves a massive sentence - however I fear most of the other people that enabled this thing in the first place will not receive similar justice.

Gonna be interesting though how the 2 closest friend and once a lover and the Co-founder of SBF will testify against him, the revelation is going to explode in the courtroom,

Caroline Ellison, the former chief executive of Alameda Research and Bankman-Fried’s sometime lover, and Gary Wang, a co-founder of the $32-billion crypto exchange, were charged “in connection with their roles in the frauds that contributed to FTX’s collapse,” U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Damian Williams said in a brief video address.

Ellison, 28, pleaded guilty to seven counts, including wire fraud and conspiracy to commit securities fraud, according to a plea agreement obtained by The Wall Street Journal. The seven counts carry a maximum sentence of 110 years in prison

Wang, 29, pleaded guilty to four counts: wire fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, conspiracy to commit commodities fraud, and conspiracy to commit securities fraud. He faces up to five decades behind bars.

https://news.yahoo.com/sbf-girlfriend-ftx-co-founder-030124940.html

So with this 2 also have a case against them, for sure they will squeal what's the inner workings behind, and point everything to SBF to save their faces and get a lenient sentence.

[Iranus]

$250 million is not a small amount, and it is surprising when they say that there is no money to pay the investor but can spend 250 million just to let SBF be released. I remember not long ago the SBF himself said that the amount in his account is now no more than 100k dollars and he is about to go empty-handed but now he can spend big money just to be with his parents during the trial of the case. I wonder where this money is coming from, who can fund SBF?
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sam-bankman-fried-says-100k-182544871.html#:~:text=Sam%20Bankman%2DFried%2C%20the%20former,%2426.5%20billion%2C%20according%20to%20Axios.

[Celinena]

Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried has been released on bail after appearing in U.S. federal court in New York on Thursday. Bankman-Fried was told he can live with his parents on $250 million bail secured in part by their Palo Alto, California, house. His release also includes a long list of requirements for him to remain free while he faces charges. He's not allowed to make financial transactions of more than $1,000, can't open new lines of credit, can't leave the house except to exercise and must go through substance abuse and mental health treatment, according to the agreement.

More @ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/12/23/first-mover-americas-sec-scrutnizes-crypto-audits-sbf-gets-bail/

It is impossible to avoid trial, but I think the sentence may not be as serious as the sentence in the middle, but the appropriate imprisonment is definitely inevitable, otherwise how to appease the public outrage?

[franky1]

it appears that no money was actually used in the bail
it was a bonded promise meaning $0 upfront

where parents would lose house and have to pay upto $250m if SBF absconds

im sure the courts also have US marshalls parked on the street outside the home 'just in case'

but i do have to laugh
he is released on a bail of said $250m where by no money was needed upfront..
'only in murica' can someone say a huge numbered value, but not need to have real money to back it up

after all isnt the crimes he is alleged of committing, that he promised to pay billions to customers but didnt have the value to pay up.. and yet the courts mention a bond amount but not request money upfront..
seems like its the 'blind leading the blind' in the same  circles as the ones that tripped him up in the first place

lets imagine he did abscond. lets imagine the court demanded parents pay $250m
end result they cant. so they just do an 'alex jones' and file bankruptcy to avoid paying for the rest of their lives

the court must know the bail is a "cant and wont pay" deal. so why offer it.
i find it funny how SBF was released with no cash upfront and yet millions of other people on a $1k bond who cant afford that stay locked up purely because they cant afford $1k due to real poverty

[Kryptowerk]

it appears that no money was actually used in the bail
it was a bonded promise meaning $0 upfront

where parents would lose house and have to pay upto $250m if SBF absconds

im sure the courts also have US marshalls parked on the street outside the home 'just in case'

but i do have to laugh
he is released on a bail of said $250m where by no money was needed upfront..
'only in murica' can someone say a huge numbered value, but not need to have real money to back it up

after all isnt the crimes he is alleged of committing, that he promised to pay billions to customers but didnt have the value to pay up.. and yet the courts mention a bond amount but not request money upfront..
seems like its the 'blind leading the blind' in the same  circles as the ones that tripped him up in the first place

lets imagine he did abscond. lets imagine the court demanded parents pay $250m
end result they cant. so they just do an 'alex jones' and file bankruptcy to avoid paying for the rest of their lives

the court must know the bail is a "cant and wont pay" deal. so why offer it.
i find it funny how SBF was released with no cash upfront and yet millions of other people on a $1k bond who cant afford that stay locked up purely because they cant afford $1k due to real poverty

While I agree with your general sentiment of very strange things happening in the courtrooms as soon as "important / rich / well connectied people" (like in this case) are involved, I think you are mistaken regarding the liquidity of SBF's parents.
They own a lot of property valued in the hundrets of millions, at least that's what I read in some articles a few weeks ago. So my guess is the court could indeed get the $250M if need be.