4 ms·
When will the parents face justice? They enriched themselves and the father was even working at the company while the mother was trumpeting her son all around S
by iamleppert 3y ago
When will the parents face justice? They enriched themselves and the father was even working at the company while the mother was trumpeting her son all around Stanford to anyone who would listen.
Much like the recent convictions of the parents in the recent school shooting, these parents that helped create a family criminal enterprise need to be brought to justice and serve time in prison right along with their son.
- reactordev 3y agoBasically anyone who profited off SBF giving them cash or a position in the company is liable. The issue is it’s too easy to take this too far and start suing everyone at the company that profited at all. One could make a case that the parents knew, colluded with, and championed his actions. That would be the only avenue in this case.
- throwaway48476 3y agoColluded? The parents were instrumental in the scheme. The father was the one to architect the legal structure to avoid regulation and the mothers connections to politicians kept the regulators from looking into FTX. Without them it wouldn't have been possible. The parents had enough connections to get themselves out of jail by pinning all the blame on their son.
- reactordev 3y agoIf that’s the case then yes, they should be involved in some sort of criminal investigation. I still like to presume innocence. But if it smells like a dog, barks like a dog, and digs in the backyard like a dog…
- throwaway48476 3y agoTheir political connections not only helped them further the fraud but also avoid any investigation.
- pdabbadabba 3y agoMaybe I'm not up to speed on this, but from your comment I take it that: 1) SBF's father worked for the company, and 2) SBF's mom bragged about him around campus. Therefore...jail? What actual crime did they commit and what's the evidence for it?
- pavlov 3y agoThey received a $16.4 million house in the Bahamas: https://blockworks.co/news/ftx-customer-funds-bahamas-house https://blockworks.co/news/ftx-customer-funds-bahamas-house There’s probably more grift that went their way, but this one was easy for the government to prove because their names were on the deed as owners, yet they didn’t pay anything.
- nickff 3y agoGetting a house isn’t a crime; what crime did they commit? If not a crime, what civil law did they violate, which indicates that they owe some penalty or compensation? I’m not sure they’re innocent, but I’m also unsure what you’re accusing them of.
- pavlov 3y agoThey were FTX insiders. It’s not like they received this massive compensation out of the blue. They should be investigated as co-conspirators in their son’s proven fraud operation.
- ethbr1 3y agoIt'd probably be hard to prove they were insiders. However, this is exactly what RICO [0] was created to prosecute. I'd assumed, given the sprawling nature of the case, FTX / SBF was already being charged under RICO. But maybe not? [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Cor...
- 3y ago
- jeffbee 3y agoWhen will Stanford itself face justice for being a sociopath incubator?
- FireBeyond 3y agoI saw a stat that if you look at Forbes' "... Under 30" list, collectively, they have been accused/charged/convicted of stealing/scamming more money than their companies have generated revenue. And then I saw a tweet a while back, that I admittedly can no longer find, that if you were to filter for "Stanford" in that list, the ratio blows out to nearly 3:1 (ill-gotten gains:revenue).
- tim333 3y agoThey incubated some positive stuff as well.
- DANmode 3y agoPossibly when they wrap up informing on a bunch of their friends and business associates.