Hacker News Reader

Comment by jjtheblunt | Hacker News Reader

His parents' home isn't worth anything like that. Does that mean only a fraction of the bond value needs to be the security? If so, is that not bullshit?

View on HN

Normally, the accused pays a bail bondsman ~10% of the bail amount and bondsman puts up the full amount at the courthouse. The 10% is a fee to the bondsman, the accused doesn’t get it back. The bondsman gets back their full amount back when the accused shows up for trial. If the accused flees, the bondsman sends bounty hunters and/or calls in their insurance policy.

Not sure how it works for amounts this large, but the above applies to your everyday DUI/assault/etc (at least here in VA). And even if the house was worth $25 million, they would essentially be giving it to the bondsman, which I doubt it what happened.

The rich truly do play by different rules, even when they’re charged with crimes.

> The bondsman gets back their full amount when the accused shows up for trial.

Usually, registered bail agents sign as sureties, they don't actually pay the bail up front and get it back.

> His parents' home isn't worth anything like that.

Correct.

> Does that mean only a fraction of the bond value needs to be the security?

Correct.

> If so, is that not bullshit?

It seems to mean “lots of people’s mental model of what ‘$X bail’ means is wrong.” But that ignorance doesn’t make the actual system bullshit.

thanks. who pays if he and the parents skip the US to somewhere from which they're not retrievable, and their house sells for a very presumptive 4 million?

You mean when. $4 million is a rounding error in the business he was just in.

I guess we pay, somehow.

With that level of living, he must have always had a few millions lying around, I wonder how it’s possible to come back to limit expenses to two or three thousand dollars a month, like the rest of us.

SBF and his parents are on the hook for the full amount, two other sureties for lesser amounts.

Personally fleeing doesn't really matter, because signing as a bail surety makes the court itself your agent for service of process, and default judgement is automatically available. (They do have to provide a copy of notices at the sureties last known address, but they don't have to actually serve notice on them.)

Now, if all the assets of SBF and his sureties are out of reach of the US government, that would be a problem.

Wouldn’t be totally out of character for him and his associates to misrepresent their financial standing.

No it pretty much makes the actual system bullshit.

I mean, it's up to the bond company no? Besides, the ankle bracelet is doing most of the work

Martha Stewart taught us how easy those are to take off!

I’ve got $100 that says his mom will face charges of her own before this is all over.

> I mean, it's up to the bond company no?

No, its up to the court. There is no “bond company” involved here.

Not any more bullshit than getting a loan by getting someone in good standing to sign they'll pay the full price if you fail.

But they can not pay the full price, right?

Isn't that up to those accepting the deal to determine?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com