• DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 month ago

      Firstly, fuck this person and everyone else involved.

      Secondly, she was a supportive witness that likely helped to get other convictions. She might be the reason that any money is recovered.

      Thirdly, if the sentence for a crime gets too high, murdering the people who can rat you out becomes the best strategy. Dead people don’t take the stand. It’s why certain awful crimes, like assaulting children, seem to have too light of a sentence.

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 month ago

        It wouldn’t seem like too light of a sentence if other relatively minor crimes didn’t put poor people in prison for way longer. The solution is to reduce sentences for minor, especially victimless crimes to be in line with these, not the other way around.

      • courval@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        That third paragraph is total bullshit, did you read it properly? it’s two years… Murder in the US is most likely a life sentence…

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m sure you have statistics to back up your third point, and wouldn’t make such an extraordinary claim without the evidence to back it up… Care to provide?

        • DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Not sure why you’re being down voted, it’s a fair question, and I don’t have a specific study to link to.

          I just have anecdotes from working with criminals, and game theory.

          If something will add X% to your time in prison, but has a Y% chance of preventing you from being convicted in the first place, there are numbers where it makes sense to risk it.
          Granted, it’s much more likely in a single-victim sex-crime scenario than a fraud case that leaves behind kilometer-long paper trails

    • imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      She took a plea bargain. Without her as a witness, SBF probably doesn’t get convicted of nearly as many charges. If you read the article, there was a distinct possibility that she wouldn’t do any jail time at all. The judge was relatively harsh with the 2 year sentence in this case.

      So this sentencing has essentially nothing to do with her wealth.

      • Cagi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yes, people don’t realize that so much of what was used to charge the others came from her. She was the CEO and is smart. She knew everything and gave it all up. This all would have had a very different outcome without her contribution. Whether it’s genuine remorse or pure self-preservation doesn’t matter. Her contribution was the center tent pole of it all.