News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Crypto Firm FTX’s Ownership of a U.S. Bank Raises Questions by treis on Thursday November 24, 2022 @01:49PM (#33734917)
He doesn't have to claim anything because he's presumed innocent. To nail him for wire fraud you need to prove:

>(1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money;

>(2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...

Thus far he hasn't admitted to either and so hasn't yet admitted to a crime.

Re:Crypto Firm FTX’s Ownership of a U.S. Bank Raises Questions by lazide on Thursday November 24, 2022 @03:01PM (#33735600)
You’re making claims I never did.

Wire fraud != fraud, theft, or embezzlement.

It’s a specific sub-type of fraud, and your link is pointing to a specific list of elements within a certain jurisdiction.

Even then, that vox conversation cited above combined with what we already know is likely to be enough to prove at least embezzlement.

Here is a link to some elements of the crime for that if you’re interested.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/embezzlement

Based on what we’ve seen so far, unless he somehow can convince a Judge or Jury that he didn’t know what was happening, it would be very implausible someone couldn’t get a sizable conviction somewhere on one or more of those charges. But we won’t know for sure until the situation has been analyzed. But he sure isn’t helping himself.

Which is why I said what I said. He could of course have no defense and sit there mute for the entire trial, but I can’t imagine a Jury would be all that convinced by it, if the prosecution provided even the most basic set of evidence that seems to be lying around all over the place.