Amounts of Bonds by SBF's Two Non-Parent Bail Sureties Made Public [pdf] | Hacker News Reader

Amounts of Bonds by SBF's Two Non-Parent Bail Sureties Made Public [pdf]

ia801508.us.archive.org

Interesting that the judge wrote "non-family" and then amended it to "non-parental". Makes me wonder if one or both of the additional sureties (the names of which are sealed) are siblings.

I too found that noteworthy.

Here's some speculation. I think there is an agreement between the government and SBF's NY-based lawyers. The lawyer SBF had in the Bahamas was not aware of it. In order to get him to come to NY instead of staying the Bahamas and fighting extradition, the government made concessions. One of those was that SBF would not have to spend any more time in pre-trial detention facilities. Meanwhile, the government's agreements with Ellison and Wang and their plea hearings were kept secret while SBF was being transported to NY. The NYTimes published some information about this some time ago.

The bail amount, announced as the highest on record or some such, was obviously chosen as some sort of publicity stunt. It seems to me that SBF and his family knew he was not going to sit in a detention center in Manhattan no matter what the bail amount. This is why the bail application could specify two additional bonds but no one even knew at the time who would be the sureties for these, nor what would be the amounts.

It was all part of an agreement.

I would guess the sureties will be a sibling and a relative, e.g., his aunt. We may never know because the names might remain redacted.

I thought the rats, lice, roommates, and food were what prompted SBF to go back home?

And his parents put up, what, their house? And what again was the supposed bail amount?

It’s absolutely wild the special treatment he’s getting.

His parents co-signed a $250M bond with Bankman-Fried, it says so right there in the document.

This is the house he bought for them with the stolen funds, right? Doesn't seem like it would be that much of an incentive not to skip bail, if they didn't pay for it in the first place.

so the parents apparently have $249m in assets? or this means the non-parent co-signers just wrote checks for $500k + $200k and assume some portion of the $250m liability? If it’s as little as $700k then makes sense any law firm or debtor might be staking a position here.

No, his parents are not assumed to have assets necessary to cover the full $250M. There may be a judgment against them for this amount if he fails to appear, but they likely will not meet it.

No, the additional sureties are not responsible for amounts beyond the amounts they have already committed.

Ken White (Popehat) has a good explainer here: https://www.serioustrouble.show/p/how-did-sam-bankman-fried-...

Dragonwriter has a good answer with links to the law here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34108874

Reply on news.ycombinator.com