2 ms·

I don't like the guy but if the judge had to amend the bail conditions to exclude VPNs did he really break the bail conditions in the first place by using a VPN

I don't like the guy but if the judge had to amend the bail conditions to exclude VPNs did he really break the bail conditions in the first place by using a VPN? It was a gray area that has been clarified by the judge. That's all really.

anigbrowl 4y ago
Oh nonsense. This is just an attempt at hacking the legal system by playing definition games. It's like being told not to shoplift and argue that you never touched anyone else's goods because you wore gloves the whole time. His lawyers just responded to the allegation by trying to turn it into a basis for negotiation.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  In other words: the thinks he's oh so clever and smart, but he's really just stupidly underestimating other people's intelligence and tolerance.
LatteLazy 4y ago
So... His previous conditions banned him from using encrypted communication apps except Whatsapp which he could use only with monitoring software. To my techie brain, setting up a VPN seems like an obvious breach of that since a VPN will presumably encrypt anything that passes over it (all of which is reasonably communication even if it's just communicating with Uber to request a taxi). Maybe the judge didn't understand (or fully accept) that. Maybe there is some legalise question about how specific bail conditions have to be. Either way, specifically banning vpns solves that. But i don't think it's the courts job to play whack-a-mole while SBF plays the fool. I wouldn't expect that if I got very generous conditions then broke them twice...