Quote from: cabron on December 10, 2023, 07:23:54 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 10, 2023, 02:44:51 PM

By the way, Phil's mentioning a kind of crime that is a plea to not-intending the money laundering, which surely the facts surrounding such a crime would need to be sufficient within the plea, so there would either still be intentions to certain acts or even levels of negligence or gross recklessness that would rise to the level of criminality. There are also kinds of crimes that are called "strict liability" in which performing the restricted act is enough to constitute a crime, and intention is not required to be proven for those kinds of acts that are constituted as strict liability crimes.. Many times strict liability comes into civil kinds of cases, and many times there are certain levels of intent that are needed to be proven (or plead to) in criminal cases... but not always, as Phil mentioned which would be part of the justification for lighter sentencing (or the kinds of crimes that have lower levels of punishment) - which also shows that all crimes are not the same.. They have levels and sometimes nuance.

Say CZ's team ends up wanting to suggest that the plea was done under false pretenses as you said. Though he has no intent to commit the crime, will he be able to settle a deal still after this and no more than 6 months in prison?

I don't claim to know enough about the facts of the terms of the pleadings nor the exact dynamics of the negotiations (except conjecturing that there is a bit of extra political animosity and perhaps even xenophobia built in) in order to conjecture with too many details, but if CZ were to attempt to get out of his plea (or the settlement agreement), then the justice department and the various other agencies would likely want to either play hard ball or to create the impressions of playing hardball, so they might suggest that everything all of the previous charges are back on the table and that they are even throwing in some extra charges that were not previously charged.. (even though that might end up constituting retaliatory prosecution). I am not even claiming to know exactly what the charges were in terms of which ones had intent and which ones did not have intent (or the level of intent) and the elements of the various crimes that would have had to have been proven in order to convict (absent un plea), so when someone pleas to various charges, he has to admit to the various facts that support the elements of the crime, and even have to admit to the conclusions that their actions and the facts constitute crimes as alleged... So in other words, there is kind of an outline facts and specifics that they would have to proclaim are not necessarily true, even though previously they had sworn under oath that they were true. It is a kind of complicated position to take.

Quote from: cabron on December 10, 2023, 07:23:54 PM

No intent to commit a crime seems very hard to prove since he is well advised being a big exchange with legal team.

Intent to commit a crime is harder to prove than no intent... because it is a lower barrier of merely just showing various actions and certain responsibilities that CZ had, and then he is responsible for his actions and even various neglecting to do certain things (such as putting rules and practices into place that would prevent or lessen the crimes from happening).

Quote from: cabron on December 10, 2023, 07:23:54 PM

And if proven there is a crime though with no intention, will the authorities also get hold of binance.com? As many have said ts the main Binance.com is the target of all these.

Part of the settlement (plea) involves agreeing that certain agencies are able to detailedly monitor Binance for 5 years, and many of those terms should already be outlined, but having the terms outlined and putting them into practice can end up being quite onerous for any company to have comply with intense monitoring... and maybe de facto Binance would end up becoming more burdened than regulated exchanges, and perhaps even having to provide way more documentations and insights into the operations of the exchange than already existing regulated exchanges.

Quote from: arabspaceship123 on December 10, 2023, 10:44:41 PM

Quote from: philipma1957 on December 09, 2023, 10:06:42 PM

[edited out]

SBF's did fraud on unbelievable scale so he's going to be made example by the American govt. He's going to spend many years of his life away from society. He's going suffer when he's released because he won't have money.

Those are pretty BIG assumptions that: 1) Sam is ever going to get released in his lifetime.. sure it is possible, but it is not a given, and 2) he does not have money squirreled away. Sure the various legal defenses are likely costing a lot of money, but I doubt that Sam is broke - even though he is a bit of a degenerate gambler, so it may well be that he is not very good with his personal finances.

Quote from: arabspaceship123 on December 10, 2023, 10:44:41 PM

CZ getting max 18 months looks light because of the plea deal. At least when CZ's going to be released to society his billionaire status won't be altered.

That is true that CZ seems to have a lot of financial resource, yet even the last year, it is quite amazing how much trade volume that Binance has lost.. but they do keep going so presumptively they are still profitable, even though many 10s of billions of dollars of value were removed from their platform.

Quote from: arabspaceship123 on December 10, 2023, 10:44:41 PM

He's resigned from Binance but what's going to happen to his Binance shares. In America are convicted money launderers allowed to keep shares in companies they've used to launder?

You keep asking seemingly dumb questions that have been asked and answered several times. It is like you are purposefully playing dumb and it is getting more and more difficult to even close to take you seriously.

Yes.. the plea involves CZ stepping down as Binance CEO for three years, but he does not have to sell any shares and he does not have to give up his board seat.

Quote from: Ale88 on Today at 07:06:45 AM

Quote from: arabspaceship123 on December 10, 2023, 10:44:41 PM

[edited out]

I don't understand, it looks like you have something personal against CZ Roll Eyes

It's becoming more and more apparent that arabspaceship123 is not even trying to engage with genuine facts and arguments... just repeatedly exaggerating and perhaps reframing the same dumb-ass unsupported talking points.

Quote from: Ale88 on Today at 07:06:45 AM

[edited out]

I don't have personal feelings against SBF or CZ I haven't met them I don't know them. I didn't like FTX or Binance being too big that's it. I know their crimes aren't the same so their sentencing's going to be different but it doesn't look fair when one's facing over 100 years but the other's looking at 18 months max.
[/quote]

Yes, you supposedly recognize that there is a difference, but you don't know why there is a difference in the sentencing, and you keep stating that SBF is the one who is being treated unfairly, when the facts and logic are likely the opposite.. but you state the opposite of reality because you are persistent in your desire to put out disingenuine bullshit... poor widdo SBF... it sucks that CZ is being favored.. whine, whine, whine....