5 ms·

What I don’t understand is that SBF’s own explanation is fraud. His argument against it being fraud is that he was too dumb to know that he was committing fraud

What I don’t understand is that SBF’s own explanation is fraud. His argument against it being fraud is that he was too dumb to know that he was committing fraud. I don’t think that’s believable at all, and even if that’s the case, I don’t think it makes his fraud any less criminal.

newguynewphone 4y ago
the son of 2 tax experts that have helped draft tax legislation, is insinuating that he doesn't know the basics of what makes his actions fraud, and how he wants to distance himself from Alameda, even though he is a 90% owner, just sounds fishy
- pdntspa 4y ago
  To say nothing of the fact that he was fucking its CEO. Imagine the pillow talk...
- kryogen1c 4y ago
  > the son of 2 tax experts I'm no SBF apologist, but this is about the silliest argument you could make. What does what his parents did have anything to do with anything? I don't know anything about my parents' field of expertise.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - bovinejoni 4y ago
    His parents are the beneficial owners of Bahamas real estate purchased with FTX funds, allegedly for “employee purposes”. This all looks really bad
  - thedudeabides5 4y ago
    His parents were both employed by the company and (imho) obviously still providing legal services in a world where all his lawyers dropped him. He's not dumb, everyone is just taking the bait.
  - c0m 4y ago
    His father, Joe Bankman, was heavily involved in FTX from very early on, being the firm's first lawyer. Here he is saying as much in his own words: https://youtu.be/MmmXUtRt6xo?t=2140 https://youtu.be/MmmXUtRt6xo?t=2140
    - kryogen1c 4y ago
      "Sbf worked closely with tax accountants and lawyers" is a very different argument than "sbf's parents knew about taxes"
    - smegsicle 4y ago
      oops private video now lol
- Dma54rhs 4y ago
  I had the same thought but actually his parents took part of it, they are not just his innocent parents.
  - harambae 4y ago
    Do you have any additional info on this? (Beyond the fact that SBF bought real estate in the Bahamas for his parents, which is indirectly damning) I don't doubt it, just curious what the evidence is.
plandis 4y ago
Does legal fraud require intent?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Ballas 4y ago
  According to LegalEagle, yes: https://youtu.be/WqDvsbElFXg?t=879 https://youtu.be/WqDvsbElFXg?t=879 So it does seem that this will be his defense and is probably why he is doing so many interviews...
  - plandis 4y ago
    Yeah that was my thinking as well and why I asked the question. Thanks for the link!
fisherjeff 4y ago
On a related note, I am very curious to find out what kinds of representations he made to his investors around accounting and risk management. Would not be at all surprised if he goes down on very similar charges as did Elizabeth Holmes.

newguynewphone 4y ago

the son of 2 tax experts that have helped draft tax legislation, is insinuating that he doesn't know the basics of what makes his actions fraud, and how he wants to distance himself from Alameda, even though he is a 90% owner, just sounds fishy

pdntspa 4y ago
To say nothing of the fact that he was fucking its CEO. Imagine the pillow talk...
kryogen1c 4y ago
> the son of 2 tax experts I'm no SBF apologist, but this is about the silliest argument you could make. What does what his parents did have anything to do with anything? I don't know anything about my parents' field of expertise.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- bovinejoni 4y ago
  His parents are the beneficial owners of Bahamas real estate purchased with FTX funds, allegedly for “employee purposes”. This all looks really bad
- thedudeabides5 4y ago
  His parents were both employed by the company and (imho) obviously still providing legal services in a world where all his lawyers dropped him. He's not dumb, everyone is just taking the bait.
- c0m 4y ago
  His father, Joe Bankman, was heavily involved in FTX from very early on, being the firm's first lawyer. Here he is saying as much in his own words: https://youtu.be/MmmXUtRt6xo?t=2140 https://youtu.be/MmmXUtRt6xo?t=2140
  - kryogen1c 4y ago
    "Sbf worked closely with tax accountants and lawyers" is a very different argument than "sbf's parents knew about taxes"
  - smegsicle 4y ago
    oops private video now lol
Dma54rhs 4y ago
I had the same thought but actually his parents took part of it, they are not just his innocent parents.
- harambae 4y ago
  Do you have any additional info on this? (Beyond the fact that SBF bought real estate in the Bahamas for his parents, which is indirectly damning) I don't doubt it, just curious what the evidence is.

plandis 4y ago

Does legal fraud require intent?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Ballas 4y ago
According to LegalEagle, yes: https://youtu.be/WqDvsbElFXg?t=879 https://youtu.be/WqDvsbElFXg?t=879 So it does seem that this will be his defense and is probably why he is doing so many interviews...
- plandis 4y ago
  Yeah that was my thinking as well and why I asked the question. Thanks for the link!

fisherjeff 4y ago

On a related note, I am very curious to find out what kinds of representations he made to his investors around accounting and risk management. Would not be at all surprised if he goes down on very similar charges as did Elizabeth Holmes.