SBF - Get less for Murder 115 yrs.

[wellington]

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/p...mian-williams-conviction-samuel-bankman-fried
Personally hit, commercially took a whack, though i don't agree with 115 yrs.

One thing i seem to never understand when these cases come out.

• Securities Fraud has a statute of limitations (Criminal) of 5 yrs, (Civil) 5yrs/10yrs and *unlimited

*since 2021 rules changed for SEC.

• Commodities Fraud has a statute of limitations (Criminal) of 6 yrs, (Civil 5yrs).
• Money laundering, WireFraud etc have a statute of limitations of 5 yrs, but can rise to 10 yrs if against a federal banking system.

But this is the area I do not understand, if Sam for example, had committed this fraud in say 2019, at that point he had committed say securities fraud, by definition he had likely done wire-fraud at that point, and laundered the money.

If there was no charges (2024/25) after five years of the initial act, would the money laundering/wire-fraud have run its course, or does that continue indefinently as he then has tainted funds from an act that he has not been charged with a crime over this not illicit.

If anyone knows that side of the law and want's to clue up.

I think it's important because ANYONE entering the crypto space today that has a token or other can theoretically be charged for unregistered security both civil/criminal in the US if a US person manages to buy (even with blocks) -> thus wire-fraud/money laundering are then bolted on.

Also should be factor into projects that are or have exposure to the US for investment (steer indefinitely clear of buying tokens exposed to US market).

 

[Ungcho]

I think in these cases statue of limitations starts when something becomes public knowledge, so in FTXs cases it starts in 2022, not?

That is exactly why those agencies like crypto, anytime someone touches mixed or tainted coins the statue of limitations just refreshes, so those people can be charged anytime with money laundering at least.
In the past there were cases when someone got charged with money laundering on top of wire fraud, just because first they converted some of it to Monero.

I dont get it why people keep bringing up just use DEXes or just stay in XMR.
You have a few 100k $ in crypto easy to cash out.
But doing it with large is almost impossible, good luck depositing 10k XMR to an exchange, even if you KYCd and have PoF they will just freeze your account for precaution.

 

[JackAlabama]

I think in these cases statue of limitations starts when something becomes public knowledge, so in FTXs cases it starts in 2022, not?

Not. what would "public knowledge" even mean in that case.

That is exactly why those agencies like crypto, anytime someone touches mixed or tainted coins the statue of limitations just refreshes, so those people can be charged anytime with money laundering at least.

unlikely.

In the past there were cases when someone got charged with money laundering on top of wire fraud, just because first they converted some of it to Monero.

unlikely.
ML needs a preceding crime. Otherwise provide some sources to your statement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_laundering

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/p...mian-williams-conviction-samuel-bankman-fried
Personally hit, commercially took a whack, though i don't agree with 115 yrs.

One thing i seem to never understand when these cases come out.

• Securities Fraud has a statute of limitations (Criminal) of 5 yrs, (Civil) 5yrs/10yrs and *unlimited

*since 2021 rules changed for SEC.

• Commodities Fraud has a statute of limitations (Criminal) of 6 yrs, (Civil 5yrs).
• Money laundering, WireFraud etc have a statute of limitations of 5 yrs, but can rise to 10 yrs if against a federal banking system.

But this is the area I do not understand, if Sam for example, had committed this fraud in say 2019, at that point he had committed say securities fraud, by definition he had likely done wire-fraud at that point, and laundered the money.

If there was no charges (2024/25) after five years of the initial act, would the money laundering/wire-fraud have run its course, or does that continue indefinently as he then has tainted funds from an act that he has not been charged with a crime over this not illicit.

Yah, it will run out. Thats what statue of limitations are for because crimes in the past loose relevance the further time elapses. At least that is the theoretical and also logical basis to understand. At one point in time, no one gives a rats a*s and does not benefit from clearing things up or it simply just cannot be done bc people die, stuff is lost etc etc.

At one point this stopped and from thereon, the clock is ticking.

"A five year criminal statute of limitations applies to all money laundering violations of 18 USC §1956 and 18 USC §1957. The five year statute also applies to violations of 18 USC §1960 absent any other specific provision. The statute of limitations runs from the date on which the money laundering offense was completed."
https://www.irs.gov/irm/part9/irm_09-005-005
Im not all too familiar with usa laws, it works quite different than elsewhere due to being case law.

If anyone knows that side of the law and want's to clue up.

"they" apparently dont know it themselves.

I think it's important because ANYONE entering the crypto space today that has a token or other can theoretically be charged for unregistered security both civil/criminal in the US if a US person manages to buy (even with blocks) -> thus wire-fraud/money laundering are then bolted on.

But yeah issuing shitcoins means issuing unregistered securities including eth which is also clearly a security, now more than ever before (pre mid 2022). And yeah they can add charges on top of that as they like basically.

Depends on the fine print of "exemptions, lobbying" etc etc. Eth crownies will highly likely get away with it since its like 8 years ago already since their ico.

 

[void]

ML needs a preceding crime.

interesting topic - from what I see and hear recently ML is (formally or not) seen as a transgression - just the activity leading to covering the tracks appears to be something unwanted itself

Sam's case is interesting
technically speaking the damage of his acts is clearly way worse than murdering a single person (just for example and from my point of view)

the fact that only greedy idiots who deserved this lesson of counter party risk lost money in FTX case doesn't change anything

nevertheless, putting people in jail is the silliest solution ever and servers only as a blatant demonstration of power of the state it has

 

[JackAlabama]

interesting topic - from what I see and hear recently ML is (formally or not) seen as a transgression - just the activity leading to covering the tracks appears to be something unwanted itself

Thats hows it defined. From wiki to many other sources, it states "illegally obtained" in one form or another.
The question here is whats illegal. Its just made up by whom whos got the biggest guns (and it also changes over time, important thing).

One cannot by def launder your own money you earned as waggie from mc donalds, unless you engage in reverse laundry to terror finance the next atomic bomb of the burgerkang terrorist gang living in cages which use the proceeds to create the next bomb.

Sam's case is interesting
technically speaking the damage of his acts is clearly way worse than murdering a single person (just for example and from my point of view)

Agree, he ruined countless people and caused even bigger embarrassment to certain groups which shall not to be named

the fact that only greedy idiots who deserved this lesson of counter party risk lost money in FTX case doesn't change anything

well said.

nevertheless, putting people in jail is the silliest solution ever and servers only as a blatant demonstration of power of the state it has

yup, sad state of affairs of this Godforsaken clown world.

 

[jafo]

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/p...mian-williams-conviction-samuel-bankman-fried
Personally hit, commercially took a whack, though i don't agree with 115 yrs.

One thing i seem to never understand when these cases come out.

• Securities Fraud has a statute of limitations (Criminal) of 5 yrs, (Civil) 5yrs/10yrs and *unlimited

*since 2021 rules changed for SEC.

• Commodities Fraud has a statute of limitations (Criminal) of 6 yrs, (Civil 5yrs).
• Money laundering, WireFraud etc have a statute of limitations of 5 yrs, but can rise to 10 yrs if against a federal banking system.

But this is the area I do not understand, if Sam for example, had committed this fraud in say 2019, at that point he had committed say securities fraud, by definition he had likely done wire-fraud at that point, and laundered the money.

If there was no charges (2024/25) after five years of the initial act, would the money laundering/wire-fraud have run its course, or does that continue indefinently as he then has tainted funds from an act that he has not been charged with a crime over this not illicit.

If anyone knows that side of the law and want's to clue up.

I think it's important because ANYONE entering the crypto space today that has a token or other can theoretically be charged for unregistered security both civil/criminal in the US if a US person manages to buy (even with blocks) -> thus wire-fraud/money laundering are then bolted on.

Also should be factor into projects that are or have exposure to the US for investment (steer indefinitely clear of buying tokens exposed to US market).

I don't even know where to start, so I'll give you the law verbatim. The feds can extend conspiracy beyond what we logically believe is legitimate, but unless one has gone through the battle as Pro Se, it's hard to condense it here.

Let's start with the letters of the "law" Section 903.0 - Title 18 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES

If there was no charges (2024/25) after five years of the initial act, would the money laundering/wire-fraud have run its course, or does that continue indefinently as he then has tainted funds from an act that he has not been charged with a crime over this not illicit.

If anyone knows that side of the law and want's to clue up.

(g) Duration of conspiracy.--For purposes of 42 Pa.C.S. § 5552(d) (relating to commission of offense):

(1) conspiracy is a continuing course of conduct which terminates when the crime or crimes which are its object are committed or the agreement that they be committed is abandoned by the defendant and by those with whom he conspired;

(2) such abandonment is presumed if neither the defendant nor anyone with whom he conspired does any overt act in pursuance of the conspiracy during the applicable period of limitation; and

(3) if an individual abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to him only if and when he advises those with whom he conspired of his abandonment or he informs the law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his participation therein.

 

[JohnnyDoe]

He has been an idiot. The sentence is proportionate to his idiocy.

 

[Cavaliere]

There is a difference between doing a raise and having your token being bought by randoms on the open market without direct promotions. And there are a lot more nuances than some answers on this thread imply.

The statute of limitations was raised to 10 years by Biden for a lot of this stuff I believe as well.

 

[wellington]

The statute of limitations was raised to 10 years by Biden for a lot of this stuff I believe as well.

Not entirely correct.

The SEC had it's statute of limitations (solely Civil) increased to 10 yrs for 'Disgorgement of illgotten gains', SEC v Koch (or something) had the Supreme Court determine thats gains - operating costs, salaries etc (where not unjest enrichment) and that only applies to scienter cases.

In addition subjects that are not resident in the US technically have a unlimited statute of limitations until they set foot on US soil, then the 10 yrs starts rolling.

Having said that... although ratified via congress via the back door i believe/understand it is still contested/not in motion.

----

Note that's purely civil, and purely fraud (scienter) , where a enterprise was established specifically for the intention of fraud, not unregistered securities... all other statutes remain at 5 yrs.

----

I don't even know where to start, so I'll give you the law verbatim. The feds can extend conspiracy beyond what we logically believe is legitimate, but unless one has gone through the battle as Pro Se, it's hard to condense it here.

Let's start with the letters of the "law" Section 903.0 - Title 18 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES


(g) Duration of conspiracy.--For purposes of 42 Pa.C.S. § 5552(d) (relating to commission of offense):

(1) conspiracy is a continuing course of conduct which terminates when the crime or crimes which are its object are committed or the agreement that they be committed is abandoned by the defendant and by those with whom he conspired;

(2) such abandonment is presumed if neither the defendant nor anyone with whom he conspired does any overt act in pursuance of the conspiracy during the applicable period of limitation; and

(3) if an individual abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to him only if and when he advises those with whom he conspired of his abandonment or he informs the law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his participation therein.

In layman terms my understanding, not sure if that aligns with your legalise (care to confirm / translate?)

If a SBF launches a coin in Sep 2017 (not sure when FTT came out).

That would / could be construed as a unregistered security IF sold knowingly, without blocks and promoted to US Citizens and the disclosures were not up to US IPO standards and has ommitted or fraud (same thing?)

If Sep 2022 comes round that has passed its 5 yr statute of limitations.

If the SEC hasn't argued that said coin is a security then by definition the salary, operational costs etc can't be wire-fraud/money laundering.

Sam's case is interesting
technically speaking the damage of his acts is clearly way worse than murdering a single person (just for example and from my point of view)

Took a rather big hit directly and indirectly, put it down [directly] to not enough DD as it wasn't considered a large position, [indirectly] - market took a hit overall, recovered "eventually".

*June 2022 should have been the bottom for all except alts*

unlikely.
ML needs a preceding crime. Otherwise provide some sources to your statement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_laundering

This goes back to my remark above.

If a allegation from the SEC/CFTC/FTC? etc hasn't been forthcoming followed up by the DOJ etc, then it's a case of the company hasn't legally been accused of anything, thus the 'revenues' flowing to operation costs/salaries etc are not money laundering.

Having said that, paying 200m$ salaries is unexplainable - safemoon lol

 

[Marshal]

That is exactly why those agencies like crypto, anytime someone touches mixed or tainted coins the statue of limitations just refreshes, so those people can be charged anytime with money laundering at least.
In the past there were cases when someone got charged with money laundering on top of wire fraud, just because first they converted some of it to Monero.

I dont get it why people keep bringing up just use DEXes or just stay in XMR.
You have a few 100k $ in crypto easy to cash out.
But doing it with large is almost impossible, good luck depositing 10k XMR to an exchange, even if you KYCd and have PoF they will just freeze your account for precaution.

Agree with you. That's the exact problem you will get once you touch coins like Monero.

 

[jafo]

If Sep 2022 comes round that has passed its 5 yr statute of limitations.

It depends. I know I sound like a lawyer here and I apologize, but here's an example based on the letter of the law:
The text of the law:
3) if an individual abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to him only if and when he advises those with whom he conspired of his abandonment or he informs the law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his participation therein.

What does this mean IRL:
3). i)if an individual (e.g. SBF) abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to him only (only SBF)
ii) if *and* (the coordinating conjunction) when he advises those with whom he conspired of his abandonment
iii) or (inclusive OR, so connective OR, inclusive disjunction) he informs the law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his participation therein.
In court, 3ii) alone will NOT suffice because the other side can claim SBF never informed them of his abandonment, they didn't understand claiming no reasonable person would understand how the creator can abandon the conspiracy, and a myriad of other permutations.

The ONLY solution for SBF to abandon the conspiracy (maybe unscathed?) is to provide the following: SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE by signing a Proffer agreement aka "Queen for a day" that would give him a chance for the DOJ to help him with 5K1.1 MOTIONS, *AND* RULE 35 MOTIONS.

If the SEC hasn't argued that said coin is a security then by definition the salary, operational costs etc can't be wire-fraud

It's good to review the definition of wire fraud as interpreted by the US Supreme Court. Here's a link to a wonderful Law firm:
In Two Rulings, Supreme Court Limits Use of Mail and Wire Fraud Statutes. May 17, 2023
In this article, you will find the links to SCOTUS' opinions.

money laundering.

Is it essential to read and understand UNITED STATES v. SANTOS (No. 06-1005) 461 F. 3d 886, affirmed.

You can find the whole case here SCOTUS: United States vs Santos - Money Laundering definition and then click on the links to read the opinions etc etc. It's what I have been alluding to here before vis-à-vis money laundering and its definition. Hiding money or its origin is NOT money laundering! It has to be the proceeds of a crime.

-----------------------

Hope this helps clear some confusion. Believe me, it's so confusing (because the prosecution keeps muddying the waters and moving the goalposts) that even veteran former prosecutors and judges get it wrong +90% of the time. What happens is that courts apply deference to the agency tasked with enforcing and interpreting the statute. The instructions the courts give jurors during a trial are ALWAYS favorable to the prosecution.
Fun Fact: Federal courts don't have cameras and getting transcripts of trials is next to impossible. There is NO access whatsoever to grand jury transcripts! None! Not even for the defendant or his lawyers.

Excerpt:
"Appeals of guilty verdicts based on insufficient evidence are reviewed according to “whether, after viewing
the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements
beyond a reasonable doubt.” 178 However, when the appealing party has failed to raise and preserve the issue at trial, all these types
of questions are reviewed only for plain error, an even more deferential standard."

Source: https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/02 Masur_Ouellette_ART.pdf

 

[wellington]

It depends. I know I sound like a lawyer here and I apologize, but here's an example based on the letter of the law:
The text of the law:
3) if an individual abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to him only if and when he advises those with whom he conspired of his abandonment or he informs the law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his participation therein.

What does this mean IRL:
3). i)if an individual (e.g. SBF) abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is terminated as to him only (only SBF)
ii) if *and* (the coordinating conjunction) when he advises those with whom he conspired of his abandonment
iii) or (inclusive OR, so connective OR, inclusive disjunction) he informs the law enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his participation therein.
In court, 3ii) alone will NOT suffice because the other side can claim SBF never informed them of his abandonment, they didn't understand claiming no reasonable person would understand how the creator can abandon the conspiracy, and a myriad of other permutations.

The ONLY solution for SBF to abandon the conspiracy (maybe unscathed?) is to provide the following: SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE by signing a Proffer agreement aka "Queen for a day" that would give him a chance for the DOJ to help him with 5K1.1 MOTIONS, *AND* RULE 35 MOTIONS.


It's good to review the definition of wire fraud as interpreted by the US Supreme Court. Here's a link to a wonderful Law firm:
In Two Rulings, Supreme Court Limits Use of Mail and Wire Fraud Statutes. May 17, 2023
In this article, you will find the links to SCOTUS' opinions.





Is it essential to read and understand UNITED STATES v. SANTOS (No. 06-1005) 461 F. 3d 886, affirmed.

You can find the whole case here SCOTUS: United States vs Santos - Money Laundering definition and then click on the links to read the opinions etc etc. It's what I have been alluding to here before vis-à-vis money laundering and its definition. Hiding money or its origin is NOT money laundering! It has to be the proceeds of a crime.

-----------------------

Hope this helps clear some confusion. Believe me, it's so confusing (because the prosecution keeps muddying the waters and moving the goalposts) that even veteran former prosecutors and judges get it wrong +90% of the time. What happens is that courts apply deference to the agency tasked with enforcing and interpreting the statute. The instructions the courts give jurors during a trial are ALWAYS favorable to the prosecution.
Fun Fact: Federal courts don't have cameras and getting transcripts of trials is next to impossible. There is NO access whatsoever to grand jury transcripts! None! Not even for the defendant or his lawyers.

Excerpt:
"Appeals of guilty verdicts based on insufficient evidence are reviewed according to “whether, after viewing
the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements
beyond a reasonable doubt.” 178 However, when the appealing party has failed to raise and preserve the issue at trial, all these types
of questions are reviewed only for plain error, an even more deferential standard."

Source: https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/02 Masur_Ouellette_ART.pdf

Thanks for this.

Agreed the ground is continuously muddied and it's meant to be clear for a layman.

I went down the securities rabbit hole a few years ago, still not entirely clued up, and you continuously see new things (cases) pop up which make you go huh?

Reading these setting aside SBF and trying to interpret into a common project that has a token, it appears they are all fair game as a unregistered security (SEC CIVIL) is criminal under the DOJ (5yr statute).

So from the Civil aspect, a company/project that continues to utilise funds or having built something from funds is technically still layering or laundering [perceived?].......... Same goes for salaries paid out... whereby the employee / team / other / promoter re-circulates into other things (projects, businesses, etc) they are technically [perceived] continuously laundering.

So technically [perceiving] for money laundering proceeds of the crime even if no crime charged (civil, criminal) within the time span allotted 50 yrs from now they could end up inside prison.

Seems kinda whack/quack, when you consider the sheer lack of clarity in the blockchain space itself and contradictions, turf wars, jurisdiction overreach (extraterritorial) and everything else.

Seems like pirates surrounding the wild west, quite a shitshow.

 

[jafo]

Seems like pirates surrounding the wild west, quite a shitshow.

#Bingo!
The key to surviving this is to exclude the US, its citizens, its residents, and people who travel to the USA. The last two are very hard to do, especially if they have two or more passports. One passport, all one has to do is search for a US entry stamp.

There are more traps to avoid but they are outside the scope of this narrow legal issue.

 

[wellington]

Interesting released in Ripple case lawyer.
SEC v Govil held that the SEC can’t ask for a crippling disgorgement award w/o first proving that “investors” suffered actual financial harm. In other words, no harm, no foul.

So SEC v Koch - Supreme Court (think that's it) ruled that basically operational costs are not claw-able, Congress 2021 enacted that only if its to the benefit of the "victims", Govil - Second Circuit (2023) ruled that proof of investors suffering actual finacial harm.

So from that you can deduce a project that may or may not be a unregistered security (token) that is active or inactive in the market, whereby the SEC alleges 'fraud' (omissions etc) has to provide evidence of financially harmed investors.

Now if the user bought a token to use as gas for a technology, even if the price in the market is down but the token is treated as 1/1 for the product, then it's technically not financial harm, if the token price in the secondary market rose then its not financial harm.

throws a new aspect into the gauntlet.

 

[JackAlabama]

Interesting released in Ripple case lawyer.
SEC v Govil held that the SEC can’t ask for a crippling disgorgement award w/o first proving that “investors” suffered actual financial harm. In other words, no harm, no foul.

So SEC v Koch - Supreme Court (think that's it) ruled that basically operational costs are not claw-able, Congress 2021 enacted that only if its to the benefit of the "victims", Govil - Second Circuit (2023) ruled that proof of investors suffering actual finacial harm.

So from that you can deduce a project that may or may not be a unregistered security (token) that is active or inactive in the market, whereby the SEC alleges 'fraud' (omissions etc) has to provide evidence of financially harmed investors.

Now if the user bought a token to use as gas for a technology, even if the price in the market is down but the token is treated as 1/1 for the product, then it's technically not financial harm, if the token price in the secondary market rose then its not financial harm.

throws a new aspect into the gauntlet.

In the shitcoin space, like 99% of folks can be classified as "harmed investors" except the cronies which issue and secretly control the shitcoin.
A lot of its is exacerbated bc most people being pro-traders and buy high, sell low and conform to the crowd sentiment, so everyone will jump on the financial harm thing to just avoid looking stupid in the mirror.

If youre a big enough project, you need to do lobbying to avoid getting royally ducked. Everything can be made fit then but it must be taken seriously. Small projects no one cares de facto. The worst to be in is a middle-successful project which is too weak for good lobbying and defense but still allows for some juicy fat raids and easy victory (middle class equivalent).

Thanks for this.

Agreed the ground is continuously muddied and it's meant to be clear for a layman.

I went down the securities rabbit hole a few years ago, still not entirely clued up, and you continuously see new things (cases) pop up which make you go huh?

Reading these setting aside SBF and trying to interpret into a common project that has a token, it appears they are all fair game as a unregistered security (SEC CIVIL) is criminal under the DOJ (5yr statute).

So from the Civil aspect, a company/project that continues to utilise funds or having built something from funds is technically still layering or laundering [perceived?].......... Same goes for salaries paid out... whereby the employee / team / other / promoter re-circulates into other things (projects, businesses, etc) they are technically [perceived] continuously laundering.

So technically [perceiving] for money laundering proceeds of the crime even if no crime charged (civil, criminal) within the time span allotted 50 yrs from now they could end up inside prison.

Nah, unlikely. Who would care to dig into such a thing after such long time. Theres no political point to be made to be the hero of some victimless crime having taken place in 1980.