3 ms·

Interesting: On page 4, there's a section listing out the crimes she will not be further prosecuted for. As you'd expect this includes the 7 counts listed earl

Interesting: On page 4, there's a section listing out the crimes she will not be further prosecuted for. As you'd expect this includes the 7 counts listed earlier, but there's also an 8th section that's been redacted. Any ideas on what this could be referring to?

elliekelly 4y ago
I assumed it was related to campaign finance because that is noticeably absent but it’s possible she/Alameda weren’t involved in that aspect of the grift.
jcampbell1 4y ago
I suspect she had some involvement with the campaign contributions which SBF is facing charges. My guess is it details some facts about her involvement, and then says she won’t be charged assuming major new facts don’t emerge.
artdigital 4y ago
Wait, so she won't be prosecuted despite pleading guilty? Or how does this work?
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Wait, so she won't be prosecuted despite pleading guilty? She won't be further prosecuted (i. e., beyond the charges she is pleading guilty to) for conduct related to the acts specified, if she cooperates fully as agreed. In other words, supposing there are other charges related to that cobduct which could be filed, DoJ is bound not to pursue them if she upholds her end of the agreement. If she does not, DoJ can add those additional charges on top of the existing charges (or, replacing the existing charges with more serious ones related to the same conduct.)
  - gumby 4y ago
    Thanks for explaining some of the subtleties of these kinds of agreements. I hope (and assume) these details will have no practical value to my life! But it's good to know how the world works.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> As you'd expect this includes the 7 counts listed earlier, but there's also an 8th section that's been redacted. Any ideas on what this could be referring to? My guess would be that it refers to a conspiracy (or other “group” offense, like RICO [0]) for which she was not charged, and which no one else had been publicly charged yet, such that not redacting it would reveal otherwise nonpublic information about how DoJ expects that it might charge other people. [0] RICO is cited simply as an example of a group offense that is distinct from conspiracy; I am not predicting RICO charges, to be clear.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

elliekelly 4y ago

I assumed it was related to campaign finance because that is noticeably absent but it’s possible she/Alameda weren’t involved in that aspect of the grift.

jcampbell1 4y ago

I suspect she had some involvement with the campaign contributions which SBF is facing charges. My guess is it details some facts about her involvement, and then says she won’t be charged assuming major new facts don’t emerge.

artdigital 4y ago

Wait, so she won't be prosecuted despite pleading guilty? Or how does this work?

dragonwriter 4y ago
> Wait, so she won't be prosecuted despite pleading guilty? She won't be further prosecuted (i. e., beyond the charges she is pleading guilty to) for conduct related to the acts specified, if she cooperates fully as agreed. In other words, supposing there are other charges related to that cobduct which could be filed, DoJ is bound not to pursue them if she upholds her end of the agreement. If she does not, DoJ can add those additional charges on top of the existing charges (or, replacing the existing charges with more serious ones related to the same conduct.)
- gumby 4y ago
  Thanks for explaining some of the subtleties of these kinds of agreements. I hope (and assume) these details will have no practical value to my life! But it's good to know how the world works.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> As you'd expect this includes the 7 counts listed earlier, but there's also an 8th section that's been redacted. Any ideas on what this could be referring to? My guess would be that it refers to a conspiracy (or other “group” offense, like RICO [0]) for which she was not charged, and which no one else had been publicly charged yet, such that not redacting it would reveal otherwise nonpublic information about how DoJ expects that it might charge other people. [0] RICO is cited simply as an example of a group offense that is distinct from conspiracy; I am not predicting RICO charges, to be clear.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]