5 ms·

If you believe he's guilty beyond a shadow of doubt, it shouldn't disturb you that he's on house arrest instead of in prison. His trial will last a year or two,

If you believe he's guilty beyond a shadow of doubt, it shouldn't disturb you that he's on house arrest instead of in prison. His trial will last a year or two, his sentence probably be 10 to life (probably closer to the "life").

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> believe he's guilty beyond a shadow of doubt, it shouldn't disturb you that he's on house arrest instead of in prison I don’t believe in his guilt beyond even reasonable suspicion. I do think he is a flight risk. He is delusional enough to attempt it, and may have the hidden means by which to make it.
- maxbond 4y ago
  Okay. So he's on house arrest, wearing an ankle monitor, and if he flees his parents will never recover financially. What's the problem?
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > on house arrest, wearing an ankle monitor, and if he flees his parents will never recover financially. What's the problem? That it’s not a jail. Jails are tougher to get out of than ankle bracelets. His parents are going to spend the rest of their lives fighting civil lawsuits, if not criminal cases of their own. Losing their home is a matter of time. It is difficult to even say to what degree their plight matters to him.
    - toomuchtodo 4y ago
      What do you believe their motivation is for contributing towards his bail based on the consequences they're facing? It seems somewhat strange they didn't say, "nah, lock him up until trial" considering the sword of Damocles above their estate and past performance of the accused.
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > What do you believe their motivation is for contributing towards his bail based on the consequences they're facing? The love of a parent for their son. That's a benefit of doubt I'd need to see extraordinary evidence of sociopathy to discard.
  - anonymoushn 4y ago
    Some people may see it as unjust that SBF gets to chill in a $4mm Palo Alto house while some of his depositors may not have houses as a result of having their funds stolen by SBF.
    - maxbond 4y ago
      That makes sense, but shouldn't impact the decision of the court, since he's presumed innocent. I'm totally game for working for a more equitable society where everyone gets to live in dignity even if they put their money into bad crypto exchanges though. Let's definitely do that, regardless of what happens in this case.
BobbyJo 4y ago
Why not? He did plenty more harm to plenty more people than many others who had to wait in jail for their trial. I think it's perfectly rational to be upset that someone who destroyed billions in wealth is treated more kindly by the justice system than than people who've done far less damage.
- maxbond 4y ago
  I agree the inequity of the justice system is terrible. I disagree with what I perceive as calls for his head.
  - fanso99 4y ago
    You are intentionally exaggerating this situation. People are calling for him to be jailed — a perfectly reasonable call.
    - maxbond 4y ago
      Intentionally? Are you proposing I have some kind of agenda, or just that I'm being willful in some way? This is my honest read of the situation, you're welcome to disagree. I have no agenda, only an opinion.
      - fanso99 4y ago
        Intentional in the sense that you understand that you are exaggerating and still repeatedly do it. No one is calling for him to be flogged or beheaded in front of the White House. Jailing a fugitive, a flight risk financial scammer is not unreasonable. He was extremely wealthy at one point and so there is a chance he has enough money stashed somewhere to make fleeing a possibility. In addition, defrauding thousands if not millions of people is a heinous crime, for which the perpetrator should not be given any easy treatment. When we ("the society") catch a serial killer, we agree that letting them go free on a negligible bail and an IOU note is not wise.
        4y ago

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> believe he's guilty beyond a shadow of doubt, it shouldn't disturb you that he's on house arrest instead of in prison I don’t believe in his guilt beyond even reasonable suspicion. I do think he is a flight risk. He is delusional enough to attempt it, and may have the hidden means by which to make it.

maxbond 4y ago
Okay. So he's on house arrest, wearing an ankle monitor, and if he flees his parents will never recover financially. What's the problem?
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > on house arrest, wearing an ankle monitor, and if he flees his parents will never recover financially. What's the problem? That it’s not a jail. Jails are tougher to get out of than ankle bracelets. His parents are going to spend the rest of their lives fighting civil lawsuits, if not criminal cases of their own. Losing their home is a matter of time. It is difficult to even say to what degree their plight matters to him.
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    What do you believe their motivation is for contributing towards his bail based on the consequences they're facing? It seems somewhat strange they didn't say, "nah, lock him up until trial" considering the sword of Damocles above their estate and past performance of the accused.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > What do you believe their motivation is for contributing towards his bail based on the consequences they're facing? The love of a parent for their son. That's a benefit of doubt I'd need to see extraordinary evidence of sociopathy to discard.
- anonymoushn 4y ago
  Some people may see it as unjust that SBF gets to chill in a $4mm Palo Alto house while some of his depositors may not have houses as a result of having their funds stolen by SBF.
  - maxbond 4y ago
    That makes sense, but shouldn't impact the decision of the court, since he's presumed innocent. I'm totally game for working for a more equitable society where everyone gets to live in dignity even if they put their money into bad crypto exchanges though. Let's definitely do that, regardless of what happens in this case.

BobbyJo 4y ago

Why not? He did plenty more harm to plenty more people than many others who had to wait in jail for their trial. I think it's perfectly rational to be upset that someone who destroyed billions in wealth is treated more kindly by the justice system than than people who've done far less damage.

maxbond 4y ago
I agree the inequity of the justice system is terrible. I disagree with what I perceive as calls for his head.
- fanso99 4y ago
  You are intentionally exaggerating this situation. People are calling for him to be jailed — a perfectly reasonable call.
  - maxbond 4y ago
    Intentionally? Are you proposing I have some kind of agenda, or just that I'm being willful in some way? This is my honest read of the situation, you're welcome to disagree. I have no agenda, only an opinion.
    - fanso99 4y ago
      Intentional in the sense that you understand that you are exaggerating and still repeatedly do it. No one is calling for him to be flogged or beheaded in front of the White House. Jailing a fugitive, a flight risk financial scammer is not unreasonable. He was extremely wealthy at one point and so there is a chance he has enough money stashed somewhere to make fleeing a possibility. In addition, defrauding thousands if not millions of people is a heinous crime, for which the perpetrator should not be given any easy treatment. When we ("the society") catch a serial killer, we agree that letting them go free on a negligible bail and an IOU note is not wise.
      - 4y ago