Right. I wrote that. What I am saying: SBF should not be able to get his sentence reduced because he made good investments with ill-gotten funds. Whether he is

Right. I wrote that. What I am saying: SBF should not be able to get his sentence reduced because he made good investments with ill-gotten funds. Whether he is capable of that or not is immaterial. The market continued to rise after he ceased to be involved with those investments. Why should he reap the benefit of good fortune (indirectly, in reducing his sentence) because of that rise? It had nothing to do with his intent for that money - his intent was generally to enrich himself, family and friends, and if others got the leftovers, lucky for them. Hence the three private jets he owned. Saying "well, he made some good decisions so there's more to pay people back with, so he should get less jailtime" is BS, to me.