FTX: Sam Bankman-Fried out on bail, Ellison and Wang cop pleas
davidgerard.co.uk
davidgerard.co.uk
No one, because there was no $25 million used for bail.
"He was released on bail for a $250 million bond"
No.
> Or I am still confused.
Yes, absolutely.
> If they used their home then it must be worth $250 million.
No.
> Or they borrowed $25 mil against it and got a bondsman.
Also, no.
> Somebody has to guaranty $250 mil to the court and it has to really exist or he would be sitting in jail.
Again, no.
Mainly, the actual bond document approved by the court, which details the actual conditions approved in this case, and the federal law on bail, 18 USC § 3142, which sets the rules for what federal courts can approve.
What's yours?
Here's Popehat's explainer:
https://www.serioustrouble.show/p/how-did-sam-bankman-fried-...
We have to agree to disagree I suppose. There would absolutely no purpose whatsoever in setting bail at $250 million and then accepting a home valued at far less as guaranty for the $250 million. In CA at least %10 must be provided to the court.
In New York, defendants may be charged a percentage of the total bail amount ranging from 6% for bonds under $3,000 to 10% for bonds over $10,000. For example, bail on a $10,000 bond is typically 8% of the total or $800.Feb 17, 2022
https://www.tsiglerlaw.com/how-do-bail-bonds-work-in-ny/#:~:....
The bond is meant to ensure that if Bankman-Fried flees, the government could confiscate the family's assets - including their Palo Alto home - up to $250 million. Reuters could not determine the family's total net worth.
Bankman-Fried said at a New York Times conference on Nov. 30, following the exchange's collapse, that he had $100,000 in his bank account.
Well, simply put, you are wrong.
> Someone has to guaranty that $250 million will be paid if SBF skips town
Yes, they do. Technically, the court could accept that guaranty from SBF himself, alone, and with no property given in security. It has, however, not chosen to be that trusting.
> The person guarantying the $250 million has to prove to the judge they have $250 million to pay in the event SBF skips
No, they don't. Federal law permits unsecured bond, fully secured bond, and anything in between, optionally in combination with nonfinancial conditions, so long as the court is satisfied that is sufficient to adequately insure appearance.
In this case their is a bail amount, partially secured, multiple sureties (who probably don't have sufficient assets to cover the $250M, but that's not actually the point), and a raft of nonfinancial conditions, and the court is satisfied (the fact that prosecutors also approved the terms probably helps there.)
> If a bail bondsman is used SBF would have to pay the bail bondsman $25 million to give that guaranty to the court.
Probably not in New York, given that while 10% is the maximum premium for small bail amounts in New York, it asymptotically approaches 6% for large bail amounts. But, in any case, a bondsman has not been used, so this is irrelevant.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/05/investing/doj-seizes-robinhoo...