SBF says “dishonesty and unfair dealing” aren’t fraud, seeks to dismiss charges
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
SBF: Here's my honest application.
Bank: Sorry, we'll have to decline your application.
SBF: Wait, here's my updated (dishonest) application.
Bank: Ah, looks much better. Approved.
And now they're arguing that because the bank declined the application at step 2, he should have gotten some executive and deep due diligence special treatment, which likely would have resulted in him getting the application approved?
But because he didn't, he had to lie on the next application. But said lying should be considered void, because there's a likelihood that he would have gotten the original application approved, had they just gone the extra mile for him?
Sounds like his lawyers are grasping at straws. I've worked in a regulatory arm myself, and this feels even more flimsy than the people/companies that have prematurely started doing stuff, because they assumed that they'd get a green light, or win some type of appeal.
He exposed the bank to risk, by providing a dishonest application. Seems pretty clear cut.
Did I read that right? That’s hilarious. I actually believe that could have been going through his mind to make such a decision. Not that it’s excusable, of course, but... relatable, I guess.
My guess is this guy did a bunch of illegal shit, but I just don't see what value this sort of "news" item has.
Separately, wouldn't you say that losing your fraud/abuse case is public punishment for making dirtbag arguments?
Thanks!
Somehow, I don't think absent this news story, you would have thought SBF was being swept under the rug. It's one of the more high-profile trials.
A lawyer's job is to present their client's interests in the best light, regardless of what they believe. Many people with bad morals need lawyers.
Suppose the prosecutiin makes shit up and gets a win resulting in a purpotedly innocent person going to prison on false pretenses.
Under his (SBF's lawyer's) argument, this type of lapse would be fair. After all, the prosecution isn't out for monetary gain. Is that fine?
Basically, his lawyers having made the arguments they have, if precedent were granted, it would amount to legitimizing a gross miscarriage of justice.
Any judge should see this for what it is and quash it. Then again, the legal system always amazes me in it's ability to torture itself.
“You did not pursuade me.” [0] As played wonderfully by Forrest Whitaker in perhaps the best portrayal of someone disconnects from reality due to power and ego.
If the latter, I’ve been in a similar situation, though without the ethnic cleansing. A co-worker insisted we use Slack’s thread feature, but couldn’t list any advantages to it over what we had been doing. Eventually, I discovered those advantages, and was (rightly IMHO) upset at the coworker for not being able to articulate what were actually good arguments for a useful feature.
There’s a big difference between “don’t do that because I’m wise and I say so” vs “don’t do that because it has this specific consequence from this specific model” which later bears out. (Hence my rule: “Don’t tell me I’m wrong; instead, improve my understanding to the point you don’t have to.”)
(Of course, in Amin’s case, you should have a general presumption against expulsions in the first place…)
Sure, people will disagree with you about how much things cost, or when payments are due, or the terms of contracts that you signed.
But if you're patient, you will eventually find people who'll readily believe a friendly smile and a dollop of gish gallop. They give up money easily, and they will often defend obvious cons once they have skin in the game.
You'll always be looking over your shoulder, though, waiting for the other shoe to drop. Your brain will know the truth, even if you try to suppress it, and the gap between expectations and reality will only grow with time.
Would you really want to live like that? Maybe for a day, I guess...
That's only a problem with people who force themselves to have that mindset. Some people probably honestly believe their own hype. Those are the people the poster wanted to be, the ones surprised when their cons blow up because they were blissfully thinking they were that brilliant the whole time.