24 ms·
Caroline Ellison sentenced to 2 years in prison
- FooBarBizBazz 2y agoTwo years in prison relaxing and reading books? A lot of us have blown more years of our lives, in worse environments, to hang on for four-year vesting schedules.
- bialpio 2y agoHow was your experience from the time of pandemic lockdowns? I don't know about you, but I was pacing around the house like a caged animal after first couple weeks, and I was free to leave the premises and e.g. go for a hike anytime I wanted.
- southernplaces7 2y agoThen you should have just left the premises to go for that hike or a walk in some park at least. There was no moral or practical reason or, as you mention, legal reason not to. The virus wasn't/isn't a demon that hangs around in the open air for days. If you avoided others in open spaces, you'd have put no one at risk. What you describe sounds like some strange obedience fetishism.
- bialpio 2y agoNowhere did I write that I didn't go out for a walk/hike on my own. I limited my activities among other people to the level I deemed safe and moved the rest of my social activities to the Internet, but just that was sufficient to feel caged. It made me recalibrate my opinion on what "1 year in prison" must be like.
- FooBarBizBazz 2y agoIt was ok, but I was with people. I'm sure prison is good or bad depending on who you get locked up with. And, given the selection process, maybe those odds aren't great. Time passes quickly when there's no stimulation. I feel two years would go by in the blink of an eye. In a way, maybe that itself is the punishment.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- beaglesss 2y ago[flagged]
- dang 2y agoYou've repeatedly been deleting and reposting this flagged comment. That's not a legit way to get around the moderation system here (which includes user flags). We ban accounts that do this, so please don't do it any more.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- gjsman-1000 2y agoHow many of us here could steal 8 billion, do orgies at work, and escape with 2 years of prison? If the justice department was doing their job, and justice is blind... all of us?
- akavi 2y agoChances increase dramatically if we cooperate in testifying against the perceived "mastermind", as Ms. Ellison did.
- jongjong 2y agoIt seems flawed to assume that he was the mastermind, especially given the actual outcome. There is a lot of room for manipulation in the justice system in determining the hierarchy and who gets to be offered a sweet deal. Had Caroline been labeled by the media as 'the mastermind' and Sam as 'the help' by the media, the outcomes may have flipped. The media could totally construct a story where Sam was just the helpless front guy who knew nothing, misled as to the source of the money which Alameda Research was providing.
- intuitionist 2y agoI think that would be an uphill battle. The money that flowed to Caroline looked like: a base salary of $200,000 a year, semiannual bonuses of up to $20 million, a de minimis equity stake in FTX, and no equity in Alameda. I don’t know what SBF’s salary or bonuses (if any) looked like, but he had a controlling stake in FTX, 90% of Alameda, and borrowed from his companies several times for hundreds of millions at a time. Caroline was nominally the CEO of Alameda but she clearly was not the one in charge of the corporate empire, and if she was masterminding the fraud she did a very poor job of monetizing it. It’s also not strictly he-said/she-said; there were at least two other executives who knew what was going on, both of whom implicated Sam as the mastermind.
- kayodelycaon 2y agoIt's called a plea deal. She helped out the investigation and got other people convicted. She probably would have gotten no sentence at all if the crime hadn't been so bad. The Judge "believed Ms. Ellison was genuinely remorseful and that her cooperation had been substantial." The remorseful bit is a very important component here. She didn't commit the crime with the intention of gaming the system later to get away with it. Personally, I'm okay with this. It's a huge incentive for others involved in a criminal enterprise to do the same thing in the future. It's worth letting one person off lightly to guarantee you get everyone else.
- MisterBastahrd 2y agoProof once again that justice at its highest levels in the US is to punish the poor and middle class and slap the rich on their wrists. There are people who have stolen food to eat who have gotten harsher punishments.
- jdminhbg 2y ago> There are people who have stolen food to eat who have gotten harsher punishments. Are there?
- PlunderBunny 2y agohttps://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-03-03-me-38444-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-03-03-me-38444-...
- jdminhbg 2y ago> He and a friend, prosecutors would contend, somewhat intoxicated and possibly playing a game of “truth or dare,” approached four youngsters dining on an extra-large pepperoni pizza. Not defending three strikes laws from thirty years ago which have since been repealed anyway, but this was not someone "stealing to eat."
- fUCp62 2y ago> possibly playing a game of "truth or dare" (Also not defending these laws/the decision there, but) I'm not sure why this is phrased as merely an allegation by the prosecution, since this is what transpired even by his own account. "One Friday he and some friends were hanging out on the pier on Redondo Beach. He claims he was "playing a stupid game of truth-or-dare with a friend" when he approached a group of kids whose parents had left them eating pizza at an outdoor table and asked them for a slice." https://web.archive.org/web/20230408113219/https://www.smh.com.au/world/a-slice-of-pizza-and-a-oneway-ticket-to-the-big-house-the-threestrikes-law-20140523-38u7q.html https://web.archive.org/web/20230408113219/https://www.smh.c...
- rich_sasha 2y agoI have no skin in the game, and can't judge the sincerity of her remorse, but 2 years seems astonishingly low, given she was a senior executive of a multi-billion dollar fraud. Almost makes it worth having a go at one.
- killingtime74 2y agoIt's because she assisted the prosecution so got a big discount
- Simon_ORourke 2y agoIt does indeed, if you could squirrel away a few million from nosey prosecutors, do your two years and come out "clean" the other side (assuming it's a federal rap with no possibility of remission for his behavior).
- eschulz 2y agoI believe at one point Jimmy Zhong mentioned something about how living like a billionaire for nine years was worth the one year prison sentence he received. I guess the key is to stay away from violence, and then once it's up admit you were wrong and state that you are committed to reform (or whatever your lawyers tell you to say). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Zhong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Zhong
- bragr 2y ago>living like a billionaire for nine years was worth the one year prison sentence he received He's only been out for a little bit. Give it 10 years and ask him how being a broke felon is. Especially with a fraud conviction which will preclude him from employment even more.
- hilux 2y agoThat guy will never be "broke."
- Aunche 2y ago
- Magi604 2y agoLight sentence compared to Sam. Probably threw him hard under the bus for some leniency.
- jdminhbg 2y agoNo probably about it, this is explicitly the deal made with prosecutors.
- xenadu02 2y agoFirst to squeal gets the deal. The more they need an insider's testimony to make the case, find the money, and/or track the goods the better the deal can be.
- cortesoft 2y agoYou are probably right, based on the quote in this very article where the judge says that is exactly the reason. Not sure why you added ‘probably’
- user90131313 2y agoyeah nothing compared to Sam trabucco
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- impish9208 2y ago[dupe]
- draw_down 2y agoIt’s amazing, one guy did everything completely by himself.
- aeturnum 2y agoNo, he had lots of help and this lady, who helped put him away, is also going away for two years because of her part in it. She would have gone away for longer, but she put effort into trying to correct her bad decisions. I do not like the US judicial system and also I think this particular example is pretty reasonable.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- draw_down 2y ago[dead]
- jwnin 2y agoWikipedia states FTX had 300 employees total. How many were in the inner circle? SBF: pled not guilty, 25 years. Ryan Salame, co-CEO: pled guilty, 90 months. Gary Wang & Nishad Singh, co-founder & engineering director: pled guilty, awaiting sentencing later this year. Caroline Ellison, Alameda CEO: guilty, two years. That's five high ranking folks 'in the know'. Likely others who knew but they didn't have enough evidence for an airtight case.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- throwup238 2y agoRegardless of the sentence, there's only one federal prison for women above low security so she's probably going to end up somewhere cushy with no fences and work release. SBF on the other hand... https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1av88z5/first_photo_of_sam_bankmanfried_in_jail_goes_hard/ https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1av88z5/fir...
- alwaysrunning 2y agoI don't think the Feds do work release, they have their own industries that you can slave away at for $0.17/hr. But you are right she will go to a camp since she is non-violent and only has 2 years. It's a points system and assuming she hasn't committed any crimes prior then her points will be low enough to go to a camp.
- kristianp 2y agoWhat's a "camp"? Is it not a prison? Non-US person here.
- stackskipton 2y agoIt's a prison but it's generally much more open. Prisoners sleep in open air dorms, there are minimal to no fences, there are generally good education and recreation programs and vast majority of people are white collar criminals, the violence is much much lower.
- cdchn 2y agoIt probably doesn't apply as much to white collar criminals but I wonder if she would be considered a snitch by her fellow inmates.
- throwup238 2y agoThe no snitching rule applies mostly to someone who is already in prison and consequences depend on the security level. No one’s going to kill a snitch in minimum security, worst case scenario is that they’ll be outcasts and get into a fight occasionally. The majority of prisoners are in prison because of a plea deal, not a jury verdict, so they often have to snitch on their accomplices as part of the plea deal (with severe consequences for lying and omissions). In practice the traditional prisoner’s dilemma usually plays out with everyone snitching on each other and everyone getting a deal because the prosecutor doesn’t want to waste time and money on a trial.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- neonate 2y agohttps://archive.ph/M4P6k https://archive.ph/M4P6k
- lolinder 2y agoSince the same comment is getting posted over and over about the light sentence, I'm raising this quote here for visibility: > Prosecutors did not recommend a specific sentence for Ms. Ellison, but they filed a memo to Judge Kaplan praising her “exemplary” cooperation with the government. Her lawyers requested that she serve no prison time. > “I have seen a lot of cooperators. I have never seen one like Ms. Ellison,” Judge Kaplan said before announcing the sentence. “What she said on the stand was very incriminating of herself, and she pulled no punches about it.” > Judge Kaplan said the difference between Ms. Ellison and Mr. Bankman-Fried was that “she cooperated and he denied the whole thing.” We knew her sentence would be light back during SBF's trial because she was a key witness in that case. The prosecutors traded her sentence for his.
- golergka 2y agoMakes sense. This precedent creates the incentives for criminals to cooperate in the future.
- shmatt 2y agoSo all diddy needs to do is get on the stand and describe every single party of his and he’ll get a slap on the wrist? While there should be more incentives to cooperate, like the type of prison, allowed visits, etc. claiming someone should serve less time because they described so much of their own crimes is kind of silly
- rexreed 2y agoYou only get a reduced sentence if you cooperate in the prosecution against someone else the government / prosecutor is just as or more interested in. That wouldn't be the case with the diddle.
- mandevil 2y agoNot technically true. Even without a formal plea, you can enter a plea of guilty and throw yourself on the mercy of the court. Showing remorse and admitting your crimes definitely makes judges like you more!
- farceSpherule 2y ago[flagged]
- huitzitziltzin 2y agoGame theory works.
- wmf 2y agoFTX executives have collectively gotten 35 years in prison (with more to go). Maybe this will help people in this thread see that there is a big picture.
- nebula8804 2y ago>Maybe this will help people in this thread see that there is a big picture. Don't steal money from or offend the rich/elite and you will be all right? Both SBF and Martin Shkreli have learned that.
- buzzert 2y agoJust make sure you're paying taxes.
- arduanika 2y agoThere are enough wildly different conspiracy theories around these events that I genuinely have no inkling of a clue what you mean. Which big picture are we supposed to see, and what's the relation to 35 years?
- wmf 2y agoPeople keep saying there's not enough punishment but they're not seeing that somebody is being punished; it's just not Caroline.
- arduanika 2y agoOh okay, yes I see your point and it's a sensible one. Not conspiratorial, sorry if I insinuated that. The sentences are still all at the low range of what I'd like to see, and it's fine for people to quibble about the relative treatment & how much the cooperation should count for, but yeah, the total is useful context for perspective here.
- mozman 2y agoShe should have gotten the same as Sam.
- RadiozRadioz 2y agoMy brain skipped the Caroline part and I totally believed it
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- adamredwoods 2y agoI'm more curious if all the money had to be paid back? If she received a salary of millions and did not have to pay that back, I would say white-collar crime is a viable path to becoming a millionaire? For example, Martha Stewart was in prison, but has never lost a step in her empire. FOUND: >> Late Monday, Ellison’s attorneys in a court filing said they had finalized financial settlements with prosecutors and the FTX debtor’s estate. >> The filing did not say how much she would pay in those settlements, which are separate from the forfeiture order, but it was already known that Ellison’s $10 million in shares in the AI startup Anthropic, which have grown substantially since she first bought them, provide the bulk value of her settlements.
- noman-land 2y agoWould you trade years in prison and being a felon for a few million buck? Genuine question.
- yeahwhatever10 2y agoYou think she stole a few?
- LanceH 2y agoTwo years, two million? I wouldn't, but millions of people would.
- beaglesss 2y agoAt her age with world as your oyster it would be tough. At 30,40+ already locked into a narrowly defined routine of toddlers screaming at you 24/7 because of some variation of you selected the wrong color cup, and your bank account and energy constantly being drained to zero by thankless familial responsibilities I can see how someone might find it attractive to spend a few years reading in a cell and working out with the cartel bros and some payload of cash waiting to satisfy any remaining child support.
- ericmcer 2y ago2 years in the prison she will end up at or the one SBF is at? For multiple millions, yeah 100% immediately. 2 years in a supermax or in one of the super violent federal prisons... probably not.
- jmyeet 2y agoI follow a bunch of longtime lawyers who have a lot to say about how prosecutions work in practice and it's pretty interesting. Here's what I've learned: 1. The Federal conviction rate is ~99%. Federal prosecutors don't bring charges when they aren't going to win; 2. Most prosecutions end in plea deals before they get to trial. In fact, the threat of a heavy sentence at trial is used to extract a plea deal because trials are expensive. If every defendant went to trial the entire justice system would collapse; 4. You can never predict what a jury will do or what they will focus on. It's a huge gamble but it favors the prosecution. Juries want to convict, generally; 5. In Federal court, you want to get past the trial phase and into the sentencing phase. That's where the defendant can do a lot to get a lesser sentence. In state court, it's the opposite; 6. Judges and prosecturos are aligned on their goals. Not for prosecution, necessarily. Both don't want to be overturned on appeal; 7. Appeals are a deeply unfair and drawn out process. This can be abused. If you followed the YSL trial at all, you saw the judge essentially coerce testimony and refuse to disclose the details to the defense saying there was a record that would be preserved for an appeal. That judge ultimately got removed from the case but you should know that an appeal is a much higher burden to meet than anything at trial; 8. Prosecutors want a slam dunk case. The best way is to a cooperating witness. The first person to flip, gets the best deal. So Ellison got a sweetheart deal because she immediately flipped besides arguably being the main person responsible for losing billions of dollars. Yes, SBF allowed her access to custodial funds and for that alone he deserves to go to prison. Judges have a lot of discretion with sentencing despite their being sentencing guidelines. It's one area where a judge's biases can really show up when similar defendants can get wildly different sentences for the same crime. 2 years does seem pretty light given the gravity of the fraud, even with being a cooperating witness. Her lawyer is alrgely responsible for that, I would guess by gaming the sentencing process. Still, I imagine there was some belief that she was simply naive or she got caught up in the fraud and wasn't really responsible.
- sofixa 2y ago> 2. Most prosecutions end in plea deals before they get to trial. In fact, the threat of a heavy sentence at trial is used to extract a plea deal because trials are expensive. If every defendant went to trial the entire justice system would collapse; > 4. You can never predict what a jury will do or what they will focus on. It's a huge gamble but it favors the prosecution. Juries want to convict, generally; And those are pretty terrible and make for an unfair system. How many people took a plea deal to avoid the risk of getting a heavy sentence by gambling with a jury, even if they were innocent?
- holografix 2y ago[flagged]
- alvah 2y agoDownvotes are inevitable, many people don't like the truth. The statistics showing lighter sentences for women are a quick Google away though...
- w0de0 2y agoWomen also, statistically, commit fewer crimes and far fewer violent crimes. One might reasonably suppose that the statistical output matches the input. (I would also be unsurprised if they were more likely to cooperate, and to plead guilty.) This holistic perspective is less compatible with instinctive misogyny, however.
- alvah 2y agoUnfortunately, the statistical output does not match the input.The evidence shows women receive lighter sentences for the same crime. Also, more attractive people receive shorter sentences etc. None of it says good things about human nature, facts are facts though.
- maxbond 2y agoYes, she would absolutely have gotten a greatly reduced sentence if she had been a man who immediately turned state's witness, gave them everything they wanted, and testified in court. SBF played himself every step of the way. He tried to win in the court of public opinion rather than the court of law, leaking Ellison's diary to the press, blogging on Substack, talking to reporters any time they called, flaunting the judge's orders, etc. He also clumsily tried to tamper with witnesses. SBF got 25 years because he instigated the scheme, never fessed up, and did everything a lawyer would tell you not to do. Ellison immediately made a deal with prosecutors, cooperated, testified, et cetera. While SBF was digging his hole deeper, she was climbing out of hers. And though she carried out the scheme, she wasn't the primary instigator (and there is lots of testimony, emails, etc to corroborate this). People who immediately flip and cooperate heavily get good deals. That's just how these things work. Conversely, SBF did everything you could do to get yourself a longer sentence. It has absolutely nothing to do with Ellison being a woman. I've been following this story closely, and this sentencing came as no surprise. To be honest, if you were surprised - then you probably weren't following. Refer to the article for quotes from Judge Kaplan about her "exemplary" cooperation, and consider whether you were too quick to jump to the conclusion she received special treatment because of her gender.
- sharkjacobs 2y ago> In recent months, Ms. Ellison has collaborated on a math textbook with her parents, who both teach at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. And she has written a novella set in Edwardian England that is “loosely based on her sister Kate’s imagined amorous exploits,” her mother, Sara Fisher Ellison, wrote in a letter to the court. What strange sad details. And absolutely baffling inclusions in this article and in this court case, compared to something like > Since her guilty plea, Ms. Ellison has struggled to find paying work, according to the memo her lawyers filed. At one point, the memo said, she had secured a position helping low-income families with their taxes, only to have the offer revoked after the employer realized who she was. which has an obvious angle and story it's trying to sell
- s1artibartfast 2y agoFrom the excerpts, I find the former far more humanizing and interesting. The second quote could describe the situation of just about any criminal or felon in the US. The former made me imagine a talented and interesting person I would like to have at a dinner party. I agree the story has an angle, but so does every story. I much prefer some clear but colorful statements like this to the more typical twisting and omission of facts
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- kristianp 2y agoI still don't understand why they did it. SBF came from a period as a successful trader. He didn't need to defraud people to be successful. The same thought came to me when watching the Netflix show about Madoff: his pyramid scheme was only a sideline to a successful market-making business, he could have shut it down before his losses became too great, and the losses were only going to get bigger as time went on.
- s1artibartfast 2y agoI dont think it was greed. I think he legitimately thought he was doing the right thing, thought it was fun, and thought it was interesting.
- throw_m239339 2y ago> I dont think it was greed. I think he legitimately thought he was doing the right thing, thought it was fun, and thought it was interesting. It was absolutely greed by the original sense of the word, which isn't necessary only about money, he knew he was breaking the laws given the step he took to cover his tracks, badly, but he was very well aware of the fraud he was partaking in, it was proven during his trial. There is the crime and then there is the cover up, or attempt at doing so. And ever after Sam was arrested he tried to intimidate and discredit, publicly, his co-defendant. He was fully aware of the crimes he committed, he just thought he could miraculously get out of his situation on top, like a trader who just lost and still going to bet everything: that's greed.
- s1artibartfast 2y agoI didn't say he was oblivious to the crime. I think he thought we was doing good by his moral compass
- throw_m239339 2y ago> I didn't say he was oblivious to the crime. I think he thought we was doing good by his moral compass I didn't say you claimed he was oblivious to his crime either. What you claim being 'his moral compass' didn't stand basic scrutiny during his trial. It was demonstrated he fully knew he was committing fraud, he just didn't care because he was greedy.
- IncreasePosts 2y agoHow does she have billions of dollars to pay the fine, if not stolen from Alameda/FTX users? How much money will she have when she gets out of jail in less than 2 years?
- Centrino 2y agoA forfeited amount is not the same as a fine. The 11 billion also does not mean that Ellison is in possession of that amount. It's simply the amount that can be connected, directly or indirectly, to the illicit activity for which she is convicted.
- senectus1 2y ago[flagged]
- senectus1 2y agowow. I can only guess that the massive downvotes is because she has a lot of support here... The woman was absolutely complicit in the theft of a huge amount of money in the crypto bro world. Very surprised that would see any support here.
- AlexeyBelov 2y agoI think it's not because of support, but because your comment is very strange and doesn't really have any relevance to the discussion.
- razodactyl 2y agoIdiot girl... but I feel like it could be anyone easily swayed by sleazy characters. Seems like a situation that just got worse and worse until it was a disaster without remediation. Meanwhile SBF was quite happy to watch the world burn.
- sub7 2y agoI am almost positive Sam Trabucco is in witness protection somewhere waiting to testify when they eventually get Tether off the board and crater this useless scamfest excuse of an industry
- intuitionist 2y agoFor whatever reason, the current US administration seems to have decided it’s better to keep Binance and Tether around than to bring down the full force of the law. The next administration is going to be more crypto-friendly. I don’t think this is going to happen.
- sub7 2y agoI have noticed them go after the entities Tether uses as intermediaries like Silvergate, then Binance, then Tron, then $TON etc so they're fighting the good fight. My guess is when Coinbase gets "hacked" there will be enough political pressure to clean house and enough Dems in power to do it. Fingers crossed that those hacked funds will still be insufficient to fill redemption requests because that's the only way the stablecoin goes under without seizure of reserves.
- harambae 2y agoIf SBF didn't have anything to give up on Tether (because he sure as hell would've made a deal if he did) what makes you think Trabucco does?
- hnax 2y agoWill they put her with Sam Bankman-Fried in the same prison cell?
- fjdjshsh 2y agoI see a lot of anger in the form of "she should get 10 years, it's the right thing to do". I wonder if that's precisely the sentiment that has been part of the reason the USA has become the country with the highest % of incarcerated people. I'm not an American, so I'm wondering if there's a cultural difference here that explains the different feelings / viewpoints. 2 years + owing money to the feds + not being able to get a job: this person will suffer the consequences for her action for the rest of her life. Whether it's fair or not (I'll get to that point later), it's a huge deterrence for commiting crimes, particularly for white collar crimes like this. Regarding the fairness of the punishment: I have zero feelings about this. The punishments should be chosen to make society work: deter future crimes, keep people that are harmful and hopefully help them change course. In this case, there's also providing incentives to cooperate. I don't need people to suffer for stuff. If it's needed somehow for society to work, them great, but I don't feel (as many in this thread seem to feel) that long periods of suffering is needed for some reason (to appease their sense of justice? God? The victims? All of the above?). And let's be clear: the suffering in higher levels of security prison in the USA is on a whole different scale.
- djaouen 2y agoThat’s because 30% of the U.S. is sadists who want to see people suffer. Be thankful you live in Europe!
- CyberDildonics 2y agoI wonder if that's precisely the sentiment that has been part of the reason the USA has become the country with the highest % of incarcerated people. You wonder? You could have done a little research and found that prisons in the US aren't filled with people that stole 11 billion dollars and got more than 2 years in prison. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2024.html https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2024.html This site has useful graphs but I don't see a category for stealing 11 billion dollars.
- UncleMeat 2y agoYes, a very large number of people are in prisons for stealing far far far less money. But the motivation of seeing punishment as itself a good thing rather than a thing that achieves a downstream outcome overlaps. There are other reasons for mass incarceration in the US too (perpetuation of racial hierarchies is a big one), but "people who do bad things should just be crushed" is a key element.
- commandersaki 2y agoI wonder if we will see similar sentencing for Gary Wang & Nishad Singh.