I think at-w’s point still stands - a neutered fraudster is amongst the least likely to reoffend or pose danger. Now, flight risk might be another matter.

With flight risk being accounted for in his bail being set at $250 million, surrendering his passport, and agreeing to remain confined in his parents' home. Those are incredibly strict bail terms for any crime, and clearly factor in his immense wealth.

I'm not sure the 250$ million is relevant here - he did not have to post anything like that, so if he's willing to throw his parents under the bus and rates his chances of escape highly he can leave without ever paying that bail.

Additionally, an interesting question with regards to money is if he's stashed some of those customer funds somewhere. If he has, then even 250 million wouldn't necessarily be an insurmountable barrier since billions are missing. Of course regardless of whether he has access to such stolen funds he'd never need to post the bail as it's unsecured; he'd either abscond and not pay 250 million, or stay and not need to pay in the first place.

> so if he's willing to throw his parents under the bus and rates his chances of escape highly he can leave without ever paying that bail.

Suppose he owns the $400+ million in Robinhood equity that he, FTX, and others are currently in a legal battle over. That asset would be within the reach of the automatic default judgement in favor of government that comes with bail forfeiture, even if SBF had fled to a country without extradition.

This is a straw man. The person you replied to never suggested that a person carrying weed is a bigger threat than a scammer.

To return to topic: yes, a person arrested for carrying weed is more likely to do the same again while on bail than this guy is to repeat his fraud while on bail. The fact that it makes no sense to incarcerate people for small time weed possession is a completely different matter.

So when exactly do you think SBF stopped commiting crimes?

Was it before he was let out on bail or after?

What makes someone who deals weed keep commiting crimes after they receive bail but with someone like SBF it's different?

If you're buying weed and you trust your supplier who just got bailed then you'll keep buying from him. Don't think anybody is looking to invest with SBF right now so his opportunity to repeat offend is much less.

Let me guess, possession is the last charge for many repeat violent offenders that violates their parole and finally lands them in prison.

This is a common myth. The percentage of people locked up in the US for drug offenses in general is only 20%. The share of those there specifically for possession is much lower still:

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2022.html

Police do make a lot of drug possession arrests, but the actual prison population who are there for possession is nowhere near 33%.

I guess it's a question of personal interpretation - but to me those two numbers aren't different enough to quibble over. Also, given that this is about bail, not convictions, it's at least arguable (right?) that the proportional arrest numbers are more relevant than the proportional incarceration numbers.

In any case: it's clearly a minority, yet a sizable one.

> I guess it's a question of personal interpretation - but to me those two numbers aren't different enough to quibble over.

Which two numbers? The only number I quoted is 20%, and that's for all drug inmates, not just possession. We don't have the numbers for possession, but they're surely much, much lower.

I meant the numbers you quoted. The site you link to does have some numbers on pretrial detention, and by the looks of it drug-related offenses there too are a minority of those jailed, but a sizable one. They're careful to list various caveats, so let's not overinterpret the numbers; there may be overlap or overcounting; and if you're trying to discern possession vs. other drug related offenses surely that's yet another wrinkle which a cursory skim doesn't answer anyhow.

You do realize that saying it is " 20%" do not make it better?

20% includes shooting someone and then getting caught with 10kg of heroin. Nobody gets prison for 0.1g.

20% is not for possession. 20% is all drug-related charges. Many if not most of those are going to be intent to sell.

From the graphic it says 1/3rd of those are unconvicted.

   > One third of incarcerated folks in the US are there for possession charges.

This is a wildly inaccurate stat, where on earth did you get it? The number of people sentenced on just a simple possession charge is minuscule. Almost always, it's because the underlying crime was violating their parole/probation from a different charge in the course of the arrest.