5 ms·

In previous discussions, I said there was a 0% chance she got some sort of deal. I was downvoted to hell, but this guilty plea shows how it works in real life,

In previous discussions, I said there was a 0% chance she got some sort of deal. I was downvoted to hell, but this guilty plea shows how it works in real life, not TV. The deal is you cooperate voluntarily and the court is allowed to provide sentencing leniency. The only thing she gets is the prosecution agrees to tell the court she cooperated.

ceejayoz 4y ago
> The only thing she gets is the prosecution agrees to tell the court she cooperated. That is the deal. It's a cooperating plea deal; prosecutors will accept a much smaller sentence (out of the very wide ranges available) if they follow through on the coperating part.
- jcampbell1 4y ago
  Exactly. People were throwing out potential immunity, or other complete nonsense for cooperation. There weren’t even discussions about recommended prison time as that can blow the prosecutions case against SBF. The idea that there is some agreement for say 5 years recommended is not on the table in this type of situation.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > People were throwing out potential immunity... Yes, getting off scot-free seems unlikely. > The idea that there is some agreement for say 5 years recommended is not on the table in this type of situation. Sure it is. The Feds will ask to suspend sentencing on these charges until their cooperation is completed. If they cooperate appropriately, they'll spend much less time in prison than if they'd pled not guitly.
  - elliekelly 4y ago
    > The idea that there is some agreement for say 5 years recommended is not on the table in this type of situation. That is absolutely the situation. That’s why you take the deal. They got her to plead to seven counts! There’s almost certainly an agreed-upon recommended sentencing.
    - jcampbell1 4y ago
      Please just read the plea deal. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-cooperator-ftx-alamedas-caroline-ellisons-plea-agreement-inner-city-press-on-the-case https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-coop...
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - elliekelly 4y ago
        I think you’re hung up on the number of years thing. The whole reason you cooperate is to get a reduced sentence. So of course that’s part of the deal. That’s the point of it. The formal agreement isn’t going to spell out “we will recommend X years” for a lot of reasons. First, what if she doesn’t cooperate? Or worse, lies and impedes the prosecution? More importantly, having a set-in-stone agreement like that for a specified number of years undermines your witness. And from the government’s perspective that’s the whole reason they do the deal: to have a witness. Imagine Caroline Ellison on the witness stand. “Ms. Ellison you were looking at charges that could bring 110 years of prison or more, is that correct? And how many years did the prosecutor’s office agree to recommend instead in exchange for your testimony today?” There’s really no good answer, is there? The best answer your witness can give in that situation is something along the lines of “I’m cooperating with the hopes that the prosecution will recommend leniency to the court at my sentencing.” So that’s exactly the situation they’ve put her in. They’re under no obligation, per the agreement, but it’s absolutely on the table. And, assuming she holds up her end of the bargain, they will definitely file a motion with the court to have her sentence drastically reduced. Although the judge will be free to ignore it.
        Kon-Peki 4y ago
        The defense asks that question to every single cooperating witness. They also ask every single expert witness how much they got paid for their testimony. It doesn’t sway the jury.
    - abigail95 4y ago
- tiahura 4y ago
  prosecutors will accept a much smaller sentence Not sure what you mean there. The prosecution recommends a sentence to the judge. They are agreeing to recommend a shorter sentence than they would have if she fought. Judges (especially federal) are despots and don’t care at all about prosecutors or what prosecutors want. The judge will want to know exactly how much she blew on bad investments, how much she stole for herself, and how useful her cooperation has been. Then, using the sentencing guidelines and the United States Probation and Pretrial Services Office Presentencing report, the judge will impose a sentence.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    It means they won't do this. https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-business-34deb7d885dd1e495b8a06dafc627f14 https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-business-34deb7d885d... > Prosecutors urged a judge Wednesday to impose a “very substantial” prison sentence on Michael Avenatti for trying to extort millions of dollars from Nike. > Prosecutors noted in a Manhattan federal court submission that Probation Office officials recommend an eight-year prison term for the California attorney who gained fame three years ago through his representation of porn star Stormy Daniels against then-President Donald Trump.
    - heisenbit 4y ago
      Based on what is now known about how Trump wielded the IRS it may be worth looking into the motivation of these prosecutors.
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        No. Avenatti they caught dead to rights doing all sorts of shitty things. His being anti-Trump didn’t make him a good person.
olalonde 4y ago
Why is she's out on bail if she has already plead guilty? What's the next step for her?
- jcampbell1 4y ago
  She will be sentenced after SBF. If all goes well for her, there will be few victim impact statements at her sentencing.
- elliekelly 4y ago
  That’s part of “the deal” they struck.
djmips 4y ago
Don't crow some kind of victory until the show is over.
chollida1 4y ago
> In previous discussions, I said there was a 0% chance she got some sort of deal. Well that prediction didn't age well. Looks like she got herself a deal.
- jcampbell1 4y ago
  She got one thing… they won’t pursue tax fraud charges. Wow. Everything else she gets is from the courts.
  - chollida1 4y ago
    > She got one thing… they won’t pursue tax fraud charges I think you massively misread the doc. Read the doc, its not that long https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-cooperator-ftx-alamedas-caroline-ellisons-plea-agreement-inner-city-press-on-the-case https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-coop... > Moreover,if the defendant fully complies with the understandings specified in this Agreement, the defendant will not be further prosecuted criminally by this Office for any crimes, except for criminal tax violations They agreed to not charge her with more crimes other than tax evasion. That's a huge deal given what she could have been charged with. That's a huge difference from what you quoted.
  - dbt00 4y ago
    That's not... that's not at all what that letter says. Her deal is that they won't prosecute her for anything else related to these crimes except that they can't promise she won't be prosecuted for tax fraud. Her deal is also a sentencing recommendation that a judge is very likely to accept.

ceejayoz 4y ago

> The only thing she gets is the prosecution agrees to tell the court she cooperated. That is the deal. It's a cooperating plea deal; prosecutors will accept a much smaller sentence (out of the very wide ranges available) if they follow through on the coperating part.

jcampbell1 4y ago
Exactly. People were throwing out potential immunity, or other complete nonsense for cooperation. There weren’t even discussions about recommended prison time as that can blow the prosecutions case against SBF. The idea that there is some agreement for say 5 years recommended is not on the table in this type of situation.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > People were throwing out potential immunity... Yes, getting off scot-free seems unlikely. > The idea that there is some agreement for say 5 years recommended is not on the table in this type of situation. Sure it is. The Feds will ask to suspend sentencing on these charges until their cooperation is completed. If they cooperate appropriately, they'll spend much less time in prison than if they'd pled not guitly.
- elliekelly 4y ago
  > The idea that there is some agreement for say 5 years recommended is not on the table in this type of situation. That is absolutely the situation. That’s why you take the deal. They got her to plead to seven counts! There’s almost certainly an agreed-upon recommended sentencing.
  - jcampbell1 4y ago
    Please just read the plea deal. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-cooperator-ftx-alamedas-caroline-ellisons-plea-agreement-inner-city-press-on-the-case https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-coop...
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - elliekelly 4y ago
      I think you’re hung up on the number of years thing. The whole reason you cooperate is to get a reduced sentence. So of course that’s part of the deal. That’s the point of it. The formal agreement isn’t going to spell out “we will recommend X years” for a lot of reasons. First, what if she doesn’t cooperate? Or worse, lies and impedes the prosecution? More importantly, having a set-in-stone agreement like that for a specified number of years undermines your witness. And from the government’s perspective that’s the whole reason they do the deal: to have a witness. Imagine Caroline Ellison on the witness stand. “Ms. Ellison you were looking at charges that could bring 110 years of prison or more, is that correct? And how many years did the prosecutor’s office agree to recommend instead in exchange for your testimony today?” There’s really no good answer, is there? The best answer your witness can give in that situation is something along the lines of “I’m cooperating with the hopes that the prosecution will recommend leniency to the court at my sentencing.” So that’s exactly the situation they’ve put her in. They’re under no obligation, per the agreement, but it’s absolutely on the table. And, assuming she holds up her end of the bargain, they will definitely file a motion with the court to have her sentence drastically reduced. Although the judge will be free to ignore it.
      - Kon-Peki 4y ago
        The defense asks that question to every single cooperating witness. They also ask every single expert witness how much they got paid for their testimony. It doesn’t sway the jury.
  - abigail95 4y ago
tiahura 4y ago
prosecutors will accept a much smaller sentence Not sure what you mean there. The prosecution recommends a sentence to the judge. They are agreeing to recommend a shorter sentence than they would have if she fought. Judges (especially federal) are despots and don’t care at all about prosecutors or what prosecutors want. The judge will want to know exactly how much she blew on bad investments, how much she stole for herself, and how useful her cooperation has been. Then, using the sentencing guidelines and the United States Probation and Pretrial Services Office Presentencing report, the judge will impose a sentence.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  It means they won't do this. https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-business-34deb7d885dd1e495b8a06dafc627f14 https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-business-34deb7d885d... > Prosecutors urged a judge Wednesday to impose a “very substantial” prison sentence on Michael Avenatti for trying to extort millions of dollars from Nike. > Prosecutors noted in a Manhattan federal court submission that Probation Office officials recommend an eight-year prison term for the California attorney who gained fame three years ago through his representation of porn star Stormy Daniels against then-President Donald Trump.
  - heisenbit 4y ago
    Based on what is now known about how Trump wielded the IRS it may be worth looking into the motivation of these prosecutors.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      No. Avenatti they caught dead to rights doing all sorts of shitty things. His being anti-Trump didn’t make him a good person.

olalonde 4y ago

Why is she's out on bail if she has already plead guilty? What's the next step for her?

jcampbell1 4y ago
She will be sentenced after SBF. If all goes well for her, there will be few victim impact statements at her sentencing.
elliekelly 4y ago
That’s part of “the deal” they struck.

djmips 4y ago

Don't crow some kind of victory until the show is over.

chollida1 4y ago

> In previous discussions, I said there was a 0% chance she got some sort of deal. Well that prediction didn't age well. Looks like she got herself a deal.

jcampbell1 4y ago
She got one thing… they won’t pursue tax fraud charges. Wow. Everything else she gets is from the courts.
- chollida1 4y ago
  > She got one thing… they won’t pursue tax fraud charges I think you massively misread the doc. Read the doc, its not that long https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-cooperator-ftx-alamedas-caroline-ellisons-plea-agreement-inner-city-press-on-the-case https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23495436-crypto-coop... > Moreover,if the defendant fully complies with the understandings specified in this Agreement, the defendant will not be further prosecuted criminally by this Office for any crimes, except for criminal tax violations They agreed to not charge her with more crimes other than tax evasion. That's a huge deal given what she could have been charged with. That's a huge difference from what you quoted.
- dbt00 4y ago
  That's not... that's not at all what that letter says. Her deal is that they won't prosecute her for anything else related to these crimes except that they can't promise she won't be prosecuted for tax fraud. Her deal is also a sentencing recommendation that a judge is very likely to accept.