8 ms·

The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scot free is unbelievable. I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system

The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scot free is unbelievable. I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system. It's going to be a legal fight all the way -- and SBF has few friends and doesn't have any money - he's likely going to prison or spend the rest of his life in a country where he can't be extradited to the US. Go look at Bernie Madoff as an example of someone who defrauded a lot of people and was much more respected then SBF was. Think people - don't just whine like a bunch of petulant children how the game is rigged. edit: Scott to scot

throwawaysleep 4y ago
It is the same mindless angry mob sentiment that has existed through the ages, from the crucifixion of Jesus to the burning of witches to the lynchings through the American South. People bray for blood and deem the government corrupt and ineffective if it is not immediately provided.
avn2109 4y ago
"Scott free" is maybe a bit strong, but it's totally plausible that he'll walk away with a slap on the wrist. White collar crime is famous for leading to leniency.
- philovivero 4y ago
  "Scott free" is way too strong. Like, a whole extra T strong. It should be scot free. All that said, I'm not sure how this will play out. He cozied up to the right people, but so did Epstein, and he... definitely did not get away scot free.
  - null_object 4y ago
    > but so did Epstein, and he... definitely did not get away scot free Not a big conspiracy fan, but in the case of Epstein, he very obviously made a mistake in compiling files of incriminating evidence on the rich and powerful who'd used his 'services'. I'd say he was expected to disappear in case of problems, in one way or another. And it's at least possible that when he didn't do it himself, he was 'helped' on his way.
    - cobbzilla 4y ago
      > he very obviously made a mistake in compiling files of incriminating evidence on the rich and powerful This strategy clearly seems to have worked well in some cases (Scientology, Hoover’s FBI). Maybe you need a big institution engaging in the strategy, to obfuscate and diffuse the responsibility & blame?
gadders 4y ago
Conversely, look at how many of Maxwell/Epstein's clients that have been prosecuted so far.
- bilvar 4y ago
  The first case in history that a sex trafficker was trafficking victims to nobody.
- boringg 4y ago
  But, for apples to apples sake, if were using equivalent examples - SBF is Epstein not the clients of Epstein.
  - gadders 4y ago
    In some ways yes, but Epstein's clients were more powerful and wealthy than Epstein was. My point is that wealth and power makes you above the law.
totalZero 4y ago
> SBF has few friends SBF was the second-biggest donor to the Dems in the 2022 midterm elections. Not only does he have friends, he also has a cadre of politicians who will look terrible in the case that their major supporter ends up rotting in prison. It is unsurprising that some people believe he could walk.
- sfpotter 4y ago
  Friends? Or fair weather friends?
  - rippercushions 4y ago
    This. As a friend who's had more than his fair share of dealing with politicians in countries far more corrupt than the US likes to say, you can buy people, but you can't make sure they stay bought.
- Server6 4y ago
  He also donated a ton to Republicans. He was trying to buy crypto regulation. Those people aren't his friends. If anything they see him as an embarrassment/liability now.
  - happyopossum 4y ago
    $235,000 out of nearly $40,000,000 isn’t “a ton”. It’s barely enough to even register - but it does make the media narrative sound better as he goes down in flames to be able to say he donated to both parties. [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/11/megadonor-no-more-sam-bankman-fried-spent-his-way-into-the-good-graces-of-washington-then-lost-it-all/ https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/11/megadonor-no-more-s...
    - trequartista 4y ago
      He also funneled almost an equal amount of dark money to Republicans. Plenty of sources for this - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/30/ftx-billionaire-sam-bankman-fried-dark-money-republicans https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/30/ftx-billi... https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/sam-bankman-fried-donations-democrat-republican/672368/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/sam-bankma...
MajimasEyepatch 4y ago
Also Elizabeth Holmes and Sonny Balwani, who were just convicted in the last year. And Martin Shkreli and any number of other high-profile white-collar criminals in the last decade. The system is deeply flawed, but there is a threshold above which highly public, blatantly obvious crimes do get prosecuted (provided you’re not the President, anyways).
unethical_ban 4y ago
I feel that faith really is a component of things getting better in society. No matter how bad things are, we collectively have to believe and expect them to get better, in order for us to figure a way out of bad situations and in order to hold leaders accountable in the long term. It grates on me like no other when people not only make observations, but give off nihilistic hopelessness of anything ever possibly having an alternate outcome. To view corruption or inequality as "just the way things are" is to permit it and tacitly support it. Take 2: Some of these comments could be bad-faith nation-state trolls on a broader mission to undermine American citizens' faith in government, but I don't think HN has been targeted as much as say, reddit.
wpietri 4y ago
> I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system. I think it's more about trust in propaganda. Both parties take a ton of money, and some of it always turns out to be from dubious people. A lot of those dubious people go to jail. But this "SBF hasn't been arrested in the first 20 minutes so Democrats are corrupt" line is one I've seen as a talking point all over the US right. But it never comes with any perspective. E.g., we could look at Elizabeth Holmes. As Wikipedia says, "The credibility of Theranos was attributed in part to Holmes's personal connections and ability to recruit the support of influential people, including Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, Jim Mattis, and Betsy DeVos, all of whom had served or would go on to serve as U.S. presidential cabinet officials." Republican cabinet officials, I should add. It was more than 2 years between Carreyrou's bombshell article and her indictment. Do I believe that she got a lot of money and cred from cozying up to politically prominent individuals? Definitely. Do I believe that delayed the investigation? No, complex crimes, especially ones with intent requirements, require patient, careful investigations. And I don't even recall anybody saying that she wasn't immediately arrested because she was politically connected.
- civilized 4y ago
  > I think it's more about trust in propaganda. Both parties take a ton of money, and some of it always turns out to be from dubious people. A lot of those dubious people go to jail. But this "SBF hasn't been arrested in the first 20 minutes so Democrats are corrupt" line is one I've seen as a talking point all over the US right. But it never comes with any perspective. So much "news discourse" today comes from people who have lost their minds to partisan politics. With every news item, the only question they ask is "how does this prove that my side is 100% right and very unfairly treated". It's not even the partisanship that is annoying about this, it's the straining for a connection. A lot of things don't have a meaningful connection to partisan politics, and trying to force it constantly leads to a lot of uninteresting noise. It's as if there were millions of people constantly trying to relate everything happening in the world to Weird Al Yankovic. Except that would at least be funny.
  - mjburgess 4y ago
    Bingo. They're not trying to understand the case or offer an opinion about it. The term "virtue signalling" refers to a similar category of speech, ie., signalling (vs communicating). You can distinguish communication from signalling by the introduction of a hypothetical premise: suppose "The Issue" (eg., SBT) was discovered not to relate to "Identity" (eg., Left/Right, etc.), then would you/the-speaker still care? If not, then what you're actually concerned about is the impact of this issue on your ingroup/outgroup game, not the issue itself. Here, most either want to distance their identity from SBT, or associate it with their enemies.
ajross 4y ago
> The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scott free is unbelievable. I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system. It's more that it reinforces the priors of the people making the accusation. People can "celebrate" the potential non-prosecution since it sits as evidence for the corruption of the government folks want to believe is there. And the test will be when Bankman-Fried ultimately is prosecuted, none of these folks will celebrate the actual event as evidence of justice being done. It will be "too late", or "too little", or there will be another whataboutist argument about something that should be happening instead or in addition. (Edit: or more likely and horrifyingly circular, by removing agency from the government and claiming credit: "He was only prosecuted because The People demanded it!").
MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> and SBF has few friends and doesn't have any money He wasn't able to "sneakily" siphon a few billion off to the side for himself?
AbrahamParangi 4y ago
People believe (rightly!) that law follows power. I think the Epstein trial and general incuriosity about who among the rich and powerful had committed great crimes led many to this realization. It’s not supposed to be true in a society with rule of law but it does appear to be at least somewhat true in our society. People notice the kid-gloves treatment he’s been getting in the media (and from congress!!). And people assume that power is not against him, and so people are pessimistic. I don’t think any of this is unreasonable, although it is incompatible with many beliefs that people often hold dear.
- jmull 4y ago
  Epstein went to jail...
  - rabite 4y ago
    Sure, eventually, after decades went by and a cut and dry criminal case got dismissed because he was an alleged intelligence asset. But because of public scrutiny, largely because a dissident president named Donald Trump talked about the Epstein island issues on live television in a bid to damage his political opponents, he did eventually go to prison. If it hadn't been politically expedient for a billionaire to attack him for political points, it never would have been an issue of public concern, and Epstein would still be trafficking children for sexual abuse. Everyone knew about Epstein for years and he was personally exempted from the consequences of his actions. While Epstein is now gone, there are going to be dozens of other well connected child sex traffickers similarly generating blackmail on politicians just like Epstein and Maxwell did, and they will continue to evade the criminal justice system. Most importantly, the feds seized all of Epstein's files and CDs and that was the last thing we heard of any of it. Zero people have been punished for raping children. The only person to get materially punished for it is Richard Stallman, who only spoke in defense of one of the alleged rapists who visited the island. Nobody else has seen an ounce of heat. No lost jobs. No criminal charges.
    - stickfigure 4y ago
      There's a lot of conspiracy theory in there. All this stuff about intelligence assets and blackmail and murder to keep him quiet is all too exciting in a made-for-tv kind of way. How do we know he wasn't just some rich dude who wanted to bang underage chicks and thought he could get away with it? It seems like the occam's razor answer.
mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
Madoff admitted to his crimes (once his family turned him in I believe) which made that go much faster. It will likely take years for DOJ to build a case. From what I've read they tend to be very meticulous once they believe they have a case that is winnable. I think he and/or others will likely be in federal prison at some point but it will take a lot longer than the hot-take-minute culture of the internet would like. He also has no source of income (right?) to keep greasing the legislative wheels (aka political donations) to get laws/rules written in his companies favor as far as regulations go.
klyrs 4y ago
> edit: Scott to scot TIL https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/scot-free.html https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/scot-free.html
- boringg 4y ago
  Damn, was right all along - thanks.
scifibestfi 4y ago
It's distrust in the elite who, frankly, have earned it. The 2008 bank bailouts were the last straw for many. Epstein was the last straw for many. Covid mismanagement was the last straw for many.
- mythrwy 4y ago
  I'd add Iraq to the list.
  - fortuna86 4y ago
    Yes, all the same people gathering in smokey rooms making purposeful crime and mistake, one after the other. The same people that did Iraq decided to kill Epstein and push COVID vaccines. Do you really believe that's how thing work?
- fortuna86 4y ago
  Yes because the people running human societies have traditionally been transparent and fair until 2008. Conspiracy thinking is not new, the mobilization and scale of social media allows the "othering" of people to reach a level we haven't seen since the second world war. And that's frightening.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
RC_ITR 4y ago
Be careful directly comparing Madoff to SBF. Madoff admitted his crimes (hat's why it was so speedy). SBF is more like Ken Lay, and that took 3 years for the Feds to build their (ultimately successful) case.
bmitc 4y ago
> The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scot free is unbelievable. I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system. I think it's history that shows this and builds this low trust. The 2008-2009 housing and economic crisis had effectively no prosecutions that came to fruition. Bury things in sufficient complexity, and it's easy to get away with it. The thing about Elizabeth Holmes is that she wasn't actually wealthy or powerful. That's why she's going to prison, which to be clear, I agree with but I also think a lot of financial criminals belong in prison. Sam Bankman-Fried is in that same boat, but he does seem to have some strange connections that are a little more engrained than the board members Holmes had. So we'll see. I think he'll be prosecuted and likely go to jail, but I also see it maybe just not happening. I just wish we'd see the same reckoning for other fraudsters who are bit better in hiding their malfeasances.
- posterboy 4y ago
  > I think it's history that shows this and builds this low trust. The 2008-2009 housing and economic crisis had effectively no prosecutions that came to fruition They must have been busy prosecuting and seazing assets from thousands of debtees.
- pas 4y ago
  > The 2008-2009 housing and economic crisis had effectively no prosecutions that came to fruition. Because it was not a crime at that point to bet against common sense. > Bury things in sufficient complexity, and it's easy to get away with it. Yes, but that's why there's the whole system of independent government institutions, staffed by specialists, and they are supposed to understand the complex aspects of economy/society, recommend specific actions, warn legislators, publish summary statistics, ask for better tools, etc. And as is tradition these institutions are themselves used as political tools, are suffering from regulatory capture, are underfunded, and ineffective. Just as the SEC was "asleep" the FDA/FTC was too. *But* it's very important to not forget that, even though everyone wants magically better institutions, just making laws stricter and other "brute force" solutions don't lead to better institutions, they lead to more government control over society, which is rarely a net positive. . . . > I just wish we'd see the same reckoning for other fraudsters who are bit better in hiding their malfeasances. Yeah, but that's mostly consumer protection. Which is soooo laughably missing nowadays. Amazon gets away with filling the planet with junk. People already don't want to spend effort on safety if it would come at the cost of some individualism.
Spinnaker_ 4y ago
Madoff was constantly swarmed by the press and had multiple physical altercations with them. SBF was invited to prestigious $2500-a-seat event by the NYT. Something is very, very different about these situations.
- eschulz 4y ago
  So many things are different. Two things are that Madoff, unlike SBF, admitted to fraud as his company blew up. Also SBF's relationship with the Bahamas is certainly a complicating matter that will only serve to help him as he delays the inevitable arrest.
- fortuna86 4y ago
  > SBF was invited to prestigious $2500-a-seat event by the NYT. Where he was grilled about possible crimes.
MivLives 4y ago
Justice is a steam roller not a Porsche.
bagacrap 4y ago
His father is a law professor at Stanford. He has friends and money alright.
- boringg 4y ago
  I would wager anyone in academia right now wouldn’t touch this with a ten foot pole for the risk to their own well standing. He is a pariah at this point.
braingenious 4y ago
>SBF has few friends and doesn't have any money I think that the skeptical people would disagree with this statement, especially since the only source to that is SBF himself. There is about $3.3 billion in loans to himself and an entity that he controls (Paper Bird) that is still unaccounted for. 3 billion dollars can buy a lot of friends.
Ekaros 4y ago
I believe SBF is exactly a case that will be end up thrown away. Despite donations and connections. No more money coming in and he is on top of too much media. Useful idiot that can be cut.
the_cat_kittles 4y ago
"I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system" ... "SBF has few friends and doesn't have any money - he's likely going to prison" that seems like a pretty damning indictment of the legal system right there
comte7092 4y ago
Seriously, I’d challenge people to name a legal case this high profile in recent memory where there wasn’t a prosecution. It’s become cool to be cynical about everything in American politics, but the fact it’s that it’s just cover for blatant ignorance and laziness.
gorbachev 4y ago
This is a great article about the difference between Madoff and SBF, and also why the wheels of justice turn very slowly on financial crimes. Worth a read, for sure. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/12/why-hasnt-sam-bankman-fried-been-arrested-yet.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/12/why-hasnt-sam-bankma... To your point. Madoff gave himself up. He confessed to his crimes and didn't even want an out. He more or less gave up defending himself in a meaningful way.
michaelt 4y ago
> The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scot free is unbelievable. Well, it depends on what example you want to compare SBF to. Maybe this will be like Bernie Madoff, and SBF will die in jail. Or maybe this will be like the 2008 financial crisis, with barely any punishment and most of the people who caused the crash gifted billions of dollars of taxpayers' money. Maybe it will be like Elizabeth Holmes, and SBF will get 10 years in jail. Or maybe it will be like the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers, where there appear to be substantial crimes revealed, and yet somehow nobody gets prosecuted. Maybe it will be like George Floyd, and stealing $20 is enough to get someone killed on the spot, let alone a billion dollars. Or maybe, like Ghislaine Maxwell was prosecuted for trafficking minors to have sex with... nobody, apparently... it'll turn out any evidence of other people's involvement has somehow vanished in a puff of smoke. Maybe it will be like Enron's Kenneth Lay, and he'll be found guilty and face a big jail sentence. Or maybe, like the Bhopal disaster or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the corporation will pay some money but despite corporations being comprised of nothing except people, somehow no people will face any punishment. My intuition is SBF won't manage to avoid prosecution - He hasn't managed to spread the blame thinly enough, he isn't a prince, and $70 million in donations don't make you into Scooter Libby. But in the American justice system, it can really go either way.

throwawaysleep 4y ago

It is the same mindless angry mob sentiment that has existed through the ages, from the crucifixion of Jesus to the burning of witches to the lynchings through the American South. People bray for blood and deem the government corrupt and ineffective if it is not immediately provided.

avn2109 4y ago

"Scott free" is maybe a bit strong, but it's totally plausible that he'll walk away with a slap on the wrist. White collar crime is famous for leading to leniency.

philovivero 4y ago
"Scott free" is way too strong. Like, a whole extra T strong. It should be scot free. All that said, I'm not sure how this will play out. He cozied up to the right people, but so did Epstein, and he... definitely did not get away scot free.
- null_object 4y ago
  > but so did Epstein, and he... definitely did not get away scot free Not a big conspiracy fan, but in the case of Epstein, he very obviously made a mistake in compiling files of incriminating evidence on the rich and powerful who'd used his 'services'. I'd say he was expected to disappear in case of problems, in one way or another. And it's at least possible that when he didn't do it himself, he was 'helped' on his way.
  - cobbzilla 4y ago
    > he very obviously made a mistake in compiling files of incriminating evidence on the rich and powerful This strategy clearly seems to have worked well in some cases (Scientology, Hoover’s FBI). Maybe you need a big institution engaging in the strategy, to obfuscate and diffuse the responsibility & blame?

gadders 4y ago

Conversely, look at how many of Maxwell/Epstein's clients that have been prosecuted so far.

bilvar 4y ago
The first case in history that a sex trafficker was trafficking victims to nobody.
boringg 4y ago
But, for apples to apples sake, if were using equivalent examples - SBF is Epstein not the clients of Epstein.
- gadders 4y ago
  In some ways yes, but Epstein's clients were more powerful and wealthy than Epstein was. My point is that wealth and power makes you above the law.

totalZero 4y ago

> SBF has few friends SBF was the second-biggest donor to the Dems in the 2022 midterm elections. Not only does he have friends, he also has a cadre of politicians who will look terrible in the case that their major supporter ends up rotting in prison. It is unsurprising that some people believe he could walk.

sfpotter 4y ago
Friends? Or fair weather friends?
- rippercushions 4y ago
  This. As a friend who's had more than his fair share of dealing with politicians in countries far more corrupt than the US likes to say, you can buy people, but you can't make sure they stay bought.
Server6 4y ago
He also donated a ton to Republicans. He was trying to buy crypto regulation. Those people aren't his friends. If anything they see him as an embarrassment/liability now.
- happyopossum 4y ago
  $235,000 out of nearly $40,000,000 isn’t “a ton”. It’s barely enough to even register - but it does make the media narrative sound better as he goes down in flames to be able to say he donated to both parties. [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/11/megadonor-no-more-sam-bankman-fried-spent-his-way-into-the-good-graces-of-washington-then-lost-it-all/ https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/11/megadonor-no-more-s...
  - trequartista 4y ago
    He also funneled almost an equal amount of dark money to Republicans. Plenty of sources for this - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/30/ftx-billionaire-sam-bankman-fried-dark-money-republicans https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/30/ftx-billi... https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/sam-bankman-fried-donations-democrat-republican/672368/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/sam-bankma...

MajimasEyepatch 4y ago

Also Elizabeth Holmes and Sonny Balwani, who were just convicted in the last year. And Martin Shkreli and any number of other high-profile white-collar criminals in the last decade. The system is deeply flawed, but there is a threshold above which highly public, blatantly obvious crimes do get prosecuted (provided you’re not the President, anyways).

unethical_ban 4y ago

I feel that faith really is a component of things getting better in society. No matter how bad things are, we collectively have to believe and expect them to get better, in order for us to figure a way out of bad situations and in order to hold leaders accountable in the long term. It grates on me like no other when people not only make observations, but give off nihilistic hopelessness of anything ever possibly having an alternate outcome. To view corruption or inequality as "just the way things are" is to permit it and tacitly support it. Take 2: Some of these comments could be bad-faith nation-state trolls on a broader mission to undermine American citizens' faith in government, but I don't think HN has been targeted as much as say, reddit.

wpietri 4y ago

> I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system. I think it's more about trust in propaganda. Both parties take a ton of money, and some of it always turns out to be from dubious people. A lot of those dubious people go to jail. But this "SBF hasn't been arrested in the first 20 minutes so Democrats are corrupt" line is one I've seen as a talking point all over the US right. But it never comes with any perspective. E.g., we could look at Elizabeth Holmes. As Wikipedia says, "The credibility of Theranos was attributed in part to Holmes's personal connections and ability to recruit the support of influential people, including Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, Jim Mattis, and Betsy DeVos, all of whom had served or would go on to serve as U.S. presidential cabinet officials." Republican cabinet officials, I should add. It was more than 2 years between Carreyrou's bombshell article and her indictment. Do I believe that she got a lot of money and cred from cozying up to politically prominent individuals? Definitely. Do I believe that delayed the investigation? No, complex crimes, especially ones with intent requirements, require patient, careful investigations. And I don't even recall anybody saying that she wasn't immediately arrested because she was politically connected.

civilized 4y ago
> I think it's more about trust in propaganda. Both parties take a ton of money, and some of it always turns out to be from dubious people. A lot of those dubious people go to jail. But this "SBF hasn't been arrested in the first 20 minutes so Democrats are corrupt" line is one I've seen as a talking point all over the US right. But it never comes with any perspective. So much "news discourse" today comes from people who have lost their minds to partisan politics. With every news item, the only question they ask is "how does this prove that my side is 100% right and very unfairly treated". It's not even the partisanship that is annoying about this, it's the straining for a connection. A lot of things don't have a meaningful connection to partisan politics, and trying to force it constantly leads to a lot of uninteresting noise. It's as if there were millions of people constantly trying to relate everything happening in the world to Weird Al Yankovic. Except that would at least be funny.
- mjburgess 4y ago
  Bingo. They're not trying to understand the case or offer an opinion about it. The term "virtue signalling" refers to a similar category of speech, ie., signalling (vs communicating). You can distinguish communication from signalling by the introduction of a hypothetical premise: suppose "The Issue" (eg., SBT) was discovered not to relate to "Identity" (eg., Left/Right, etc.), then would you/the-speaker still care? If not, then what you're actually concerned about is the impact of this issue on your ingroup/outgroup game, not the issue itself. Here, most either want to distance their identity from SBT, or associate it with their enemies.

ajross 4y ago

> The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scott free is unbelievable. I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system. It's more that it reinforces the priors of the people making the accusation. People can "celebrate" the potential non-prosecution since it sits as evidence for the corruption of the government folks want to believe is there. And the test will be when Bankman-Fried ultimately is prosecuted, none of these folks will celebrate the actual event as evidence of justice being done. It will be "too late", or "too little", or there will be another whataboutist argument about something that should be happening instead or in addition. (Edit: or more likely and horrifyingly circular, by removing agency from the government and claiming credit: "He was only prosecuted because The People demanded it!").

MuffinFlavored 4y ago

> and SBF has few friends and doesn't have any money He wasn't able to "sneakily" siphon a few billion off to the side for himself?

AbrahamParangi 4y ago

People believe (rightly!) that law follows power. I think the Epstein trial and general incuriosity about who among the rich and powerful had committed great crimes led many to this realization. It’s not supposed to be true in a society with rule of law but it does appear to be at least somewhat true in our society. People notice the kid-gloves treatment he’s been getting in the media (and from congress!!). And people assume that power is not against him, and so people are pessimistic. I don’t think any of this is unreasonable, although it is incompatible with many beliefs that people often hold dear.

jmull 4y ago
Epstein went to jail...
- rabite 4y ago
  Sure, eventually, after decades went by and a cut and dry criminal case got dismissed because he was an alleged intelligence asset. But because of public scrutiny, largely because a dissident president named Donald Trump talked about the Epstein island issues on live television in a bid to damage his political opponents, he did eventually go to prison. If it hadn't been politically expedient for a billionaire to attack him for political points, it never would have been an issue of public concern, and Epstein would still be trafficking children for sexual abuse. Everyone knew about Epstein for years and he was personally exempted from the consequences of his actions. While Epstein is now gone, there are going to be dozens of other well connected child sex traffickers similarly generating blackmail on politicians just like Epstein and Maxwell did, and they will continue to evade the criminal justice system. Most importantly, the feds seized all of Epstein's files and CDs and that was the last thing we heard of any of it. Zero people have been punished for raping children. The only person to get materially punished for it is Richard Stallman, who only spoke in defense of one of the alleged rapists who visited the island. Nobody else has seen an ounce of heat. No lost jobs. No criminal charges.
  - stickfigure 4y ago
    There's a lot of conspiracy theory in there. All this stuff about intelligence assets and blackmail and murder to keep him quiet is all too exciting in a made-for-tv kind of way. How do we know he wasn't just some rich dude who wanted to bang underage chicks and thought he could get away with it? It seems like the occam's razor answer.

mattbrewsbytes 4y ago

Madoff admitted to his crimes (once his family turned him in I believe) which made that go much faster. It will likely take years for DOJ to build a case. From what I've read they tend to be very meticulous once they believe they have a case that is winnable. I think he and/or others will likely be in federal prison at some point but it will take a lot longer than the hot-take-minute culture of the internet would like. He also has no source of income (right?) to keep greasing the legislative wheels (aka political donations) to get laws/rules written in his companies favor as far as regulations go.

klyrs 4y ago

> edit: Scott to scot TIL https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/scot-free.html https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/scot-free.html

boringg 4y ago
Damn, was right all along - thanks.

scifibestfi 4y ago

It's distrust in the elite who, frankly, have earned it. The 2008 bank bailouts were the last straw for many. Epstein was the last straw for many. Covid mismanagement was the last straw for many.

mythrwy 4y ago
I'd add Iraq to the list.
- fortuna86 4y ago
  Yes, all the same people gathering in smokey rooms making purposeful crime and mistake, one after the other. The same people that did Iraq decided to kill Epstein and push COVID vaccines. Do you really believe that's how thing work?
fortuna86 4y ago
Yes because the people running human societies have traditionally been transparent and fair until 2008. Conspiracy thinking is not new, the mobilization and scale of social media allows the "othering" of people to reach a level we haven't seen since the second world war. And that's frightening.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

RC_ITR 4y ago

Be careful directly comparing Madoff to SBF. Madoff admitted his crimes (hat's why it was so speedy). SBF is more like Ken Lay, and that took 3 years for the Feds to build their (ultimately successful) case.

bmitc 4y ago

> The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scot free is unbelievable. I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system. I think it's history that shows this and builds this low trust. The 2008-2009 housing and economic crisis had effectively no prosecutions that came to fruition. Bury things in sufficient complexity, and it's easy to get away with it. The thing about Elizabeth Holmes is that she wasn't actually wealthy or powerful. That's why she's going to prison, which to be clear, I agree with but I also think a lot of financial criminals belong in prison. Sam Bankman-Fried is in that same boat, but he does seem to have some strange connections that are a little more engrained than the board members Holmes had. So we'll see. I think he'll be prosecuted and likely go to jail, but I also see it maybe just not happening. I just wish we'd see the same reckoning for other fraudsters who are bit better in hiding their malfeasances.

posterboy 4y ago
> I think it's history that shows this and builds this low trust. The 2008-2009 housing and economic crisis had effectively no prosecutions that came to fruition They must have been busy prosecuting and seazing assets from thousands of debtees.
pas 4y ago
> The 2008-2009 housing and economic crisis had effectively no prosecutions that came to fruition. Because it was not a crime at that point to bet against common sense. > Bury things in sufficient complexity, and it's easy to get away with it. Yes, but that's why there's the whole system of independent government institutions, staffed by specialists, and they are supposed to understand the complex aspects of economy/society, recommend specific actions, warn legislators, publish summary statistics, ask for better tools, etc. And as is tradition these institutions are themselves used as political tools, are suffering from regulatory capture, are underfunded, and ineffective. Just as the SEC was "asleep" the FDA/FTC was too. *But* it's very important to not forget that, even though everyone wants magically better institutions, just making laws stricter and other "brute force" solutions don't lead to better institutions, they lead to more government control over society, which is rarely a net positive. . . . > I just wish we'd see the same reckoning for other fraudsters who are bit better in hiding their malfeasances. Yeah, but that's mostly consumer protection. Which is soooo laughably missing nowadays. Amazon gets away with filling the planet with junk. People already don't want to spend effort on safety if it would come at the cost of some individualism.

Spinnaker_ 4y ago

Madoff was constantly swarmed by the press and had multiple physical altercations with them. SBF was invited to prestigious $2500-a-seat event by the NYT. Something is very, very different about these situations.

eschulz 4y ago
So many things are different. Two things are that Madoff, unlike SBF, admitted to fraud as his company blew up. Also SBF's relationship with the Bahamas is certainly a complicating matter that will only serve to help him as he delays the inevitable arrest.
fortuna86 4y ago
> SBF was invited to prestigious $2500-a-seat event by the NYT. Where he was grilled about possible crimes.

MivLives 4y ago

Justice is a steam roller not a Porsche.

bagacrap 4y ago

His father is a law professor at Stanford. He has friends and money alright.

boringg 4y ago
I would wager anyone in academia right now wouldn’t touch this with a ten foot pole for the risk to their own well standing. He is a pariah at this point.

braingenious 4y ago

>SBF has few friends and doesn't have any money I think that the skeptical people would disagree with this statement, especially since the only source to that is SBF himself. There is about $3.3 billion in loans to himself and an entity that he controls (Paper Bird) that is still unaccounted for. 3 billion dollars can buy a lot of friends.

Ekaros 4y ago

I believe SBF is exactly a case that will be end up thrown away. Despite donations and connections. No more money coming in and he is on top of too much media. Useful idiot that can be cut.

the_cat_kittles 4y ago

"I guess it goes to show how low trust is in the legal system" ... "SBF has few friends and doesn't have any money - he's likely going to prison" that seems like a pretty damning indictment of the legal system right there

comte7092 4y ago

Seriously, I’d challenge people to name a legal case this high profile in recent memory where there wasn’t a prosecution. It’s become cool to be cynical about everything in American politics, but the fact it’s that it’s just cover for blatant ignorance and laziness.

gorbachev 4y ago

This is a great article about the difference between Madoff and SBF, and also why the wheels of justice turn very slowly on financial crimes. Worth a read, for sure. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/12/why-hasnt-sam-bankman-fried-been-arrested-yet.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/12/why-hasnt-sam-bankma... To your point. Madoff gave himself up. He confessed to his crimes and didn't even want an out. He more or less gave up defending himself in a meaningful way.

michaelt 4y ago

> The amount of comments in here who think that SBF is going to walk away scot free is unbelievable. Well, it depends on what example you want to compare SBF to. Maybe this will be like Bernie Madoff, and SBF will die in jail. Or maybe this will be like the 2008 financial crisis, with barely any punishment and most of the people who caused the crash gifted billions of dollars of taxpayers' money. Maybe it will be like Elizabeth Holmes, and SBF will get 10 years in jail. Or maybe it will be like the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers, where there appear to be substantial crimes revealed, and yet somehow nobody gets prosecuted. Maybe it will be like George Floyd, and stealing $20 is enough to get someone killed on the spot, let alone a billion dollars. Or maybe, like Ghislaine Maxwell was prosecuted for trafficking minors to have sex with... nobody, apparently... it'll turn out any evidence of other people's involvement has somehow vanished in a puff of smoke. Maybe it will be like Enron's Kenneth Lay, and he'll be found guilty and face a big jail sentence. Or maybe, like the Bhopal disaster or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the corporation will pay some money but despite corporations being comprised of nothing except people, somehow no people will face any punishment. My intuition is SBF won't manage to avoid prosecution - He hasn't managed to spread the blame thinly enough, he isn't a prince, and $70 million in donations don't make you into Scooter Libby. But in the American justice system, it can really go either way.