3 ms·

His bail terms specifically restrict him from doing transactions larger than $1,000 without government approval, so he is actually restricted from doing this. P

His bail terms specifically restrict him from doing transactions larger than $1,000 without government approval, so he is actually restricted from doing this. Presumably his supervisors are investigating. I think a more reasonable explanation is that this is part of some consolidation of funds associated with FTX as part of the bankruptcy.

Ekaros 4y ago
Would be funny if this landed him in detention. Then again, I'm not sure if it is true. And if there is any justice in this world.
- eastbound 4y ago
  Supposing he breached the terms, would he lose the bond including his parents’ house?
  - into_infinity 4y ago
    Bail is supposed to motivate you to show up in court, or have whoever paid the bail drag you there, despite the potentially unpleasant consequences that await. Forfeiting it for other reasons would seem like a bad idea - if the money is gone either way, what's the motivation to stick around? But, if you violate the terms of your bail, you can end up back in custody.
cm2187 4y ago
Consolidation by sending crypto to "a no KYC exchange based in the Seychelles"?
- ffssffss 4y ago
  Well what's the other explanation, that he'll cut his GPS monitor off, stowaway on a ship bound for Africa, and take the money out as gold or something? Knowing that this means his parents will lose their house? For a few hundred thousand dollars? I agree it's suspicious though! I hope it's thoroughly investigated and his bail revoked if he is in violation.
  - cm2187 4y ago
    If he is going to jail he will need some cash. Do you even need a reason to stash some cash for the future?
  - yakak 4y ago
    The other explanation would more likely be paying lawyers. The fact that one has money from thin air for lawyers can not be challenged in court.
  - lovich 4y ago
    He isn't exactly a luminary when it comes to making well thought out decisions or appropriately evaluating risk. I don't think the fact that this seems like a dumb decision is a strong argument that he didn't do it.
1vuio0pswjnm7 4y ago
"His bail terms specifically restrict him from doing transctions larger than $1,000 without government approval, so he is actually restricted from doing this." "EXCEPT TO PAY FOR LEGAL COSTS AND FEES" https://ia804708.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.590939/gov.uscourts.nysd.590939.14.0.pdf https://ia804708.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.5...
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  Unless I am mistaken, that exception is narrowly exactly what it says. The only transactions over $1,000 that don’t require specific pre-approval are transactions where the money flows from SBF to his lawyers or the court to pay for legal costs and fees. Selling something where the proceeds are intended to be used in a later transaction to pay legal costs and fees would still require pre-clearance. Otherwise, it would be a vacuous restriction, as he could literally conduct any transaction (at least, where money flowed to him; it would be harder but not impossible to justify asset purchases) on the justification that he would eventually be using the proceeds to pay legal costs and fees.

Ekaros 4y ago

Would be funny if this landed him in detention. Then again, I'm not sure if it is true. And if there is any justice in this world.

eastbound 4y ago
Supposing he breached the terms, would he lose the bond including his parents’ house?
- into_infinity 4y ago
  Bail is supposed to motivate you to show up in court, or have whoever paid the bail drag you there, despite the potentially unpleasant consequences that await. Forfeiting it for other reasons would seem like a bad idea - if the money is gone either way, what's the motivation to stick around? But, if you violate the terms of your bail, you can end up back in custody.

cm2187 4y ago

Consolidation by sending crypto to "a no KYC exchange based in the Seychelles"?

ffssffss 4y ago
Well what's the other explanation, that he'll cut his GPS monitor off, stowaway on a ship bound for Africa, and take the money out as gold or something? Knowing that this means his parents will lose their house? For a few hundred thousand dollars? I agree it's suspicious though! I hope it's thoroughly investigated and his bail revoked if he is in violation.
- cm2187 4y ago
  If he is going to jail he will need some cash. Do you even need a reason to stash some cash for the future?
- yakak 4y ago
  The other explanation would more likely be paying lawyers. The fact that one has money from thin air for lawyers can not be challenged in court.
- lovich 4y ago
  He isn't exactly a luminary when it comes to making well thought out decisions or appropriately evaluating risk. I don't think the fact that this seems like a dumb decision is a strong argument that he didn't do it.

1vuio0pswjnm7 4y ago

"His bail terms specifically restrict him from doing transctions larger than $1,000 without government approval, so he is actually restricted from doing this." "EXCEPT TO PAY FOR LEGAL COSTS AND FEES" https://ia804708.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.590939/gov.uscourts.nysd.590939.14.0.pdf https://ia804708.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.5...

dragonwriter 4y ago
Unless I am mistaken, that exception is narrowly exactly what it says. The only transactions over $1,000 that don’t require specific pre-approval are transactions where the money flows from SBF to his lawyers or the court to pay for legal costs and fees. Selling something where the proceeds are intended to be used in a later transaction to pay legal costs and fees would still require pre-clearance. Otherwise, it would be a vacuous restriction, as he could literally conduct any transaction (at least, where money flowed to him; it would be harder but not impossible to justify asset purchases) on the justification that he would eventually be using the proceeds to pay legal costs and fees.