The problem I have in this case is that many things are being reported which would be immediately indictable. Billions of dollars was misappropriated, which is a felony that could easily result in decades in prison. Billions more simple disappeared, and there was even a 'back door' in their software enabling unaccountable access of funds. And this all about the time that SBF was splashing around billions of dollars like beads at Mardi Gras - living extremely lavishly, and even trying to get in on Twitter for $3 billion.

Bringing immediate charges against him on the low hanging fruit does not preclude later charging him with anything that may require further work. And it also helps snag him before he decides his little 'blame everybody else and get the corporate media (which I also "donated" to) to back me up' isn't working out and plays a disappearing act. He's a billionaire already living in the Bahamas who could easily spend the rest of his life behind bars. He is an extreme flight risk, yet the DoJ continues to hem and haw.

> Bringing immediate charges against him on the low hanging fruit does not preclude later charging him with anything that may require further work.

Actually, it very easily could:

Speedy trial rules don't allow delaying trial freely once charged, and a conviction (or acquittal) on a charge that would be a lesser included charge forecloses later charging a more serious offense that includes that conduct with additional evidence, b/c double jeopardy.

Double Jeopardy means that lesser charges effectively cannot be used in future cases. If A is required to prove B, and you convict on A then you can't later convict on B unless it can stand without A. In this case, the countless criminal acts he engaged in are largely independent, so this is not a problem.

And speedy trial rules are regularly "bent" when convenient. See, for instance, the January 6th rioters who have been kept in brutal conditions for what will soon be years, without trial, for far lesser charges than what SBF stands to face - if he ever faces anything.

This is not a defense of the January 6th guys, as I do believe those who broke the law should face justice. But I believe all people should face justice equally. And they're one of the most visible demonstrations, as SBF is becoming, that the justice system in this country is, at best, deeply dysfunctional.

>Bringing immediate charges against him on the low hanging fruit does not preclude later charging him with anything that may require further work.

The US judicial system is always "one chance to convict (Double Jeopardy), many chances to appeal" and given the whole 'speedy trial' thing (The Feds get about 2 months), building a case is the only reasonable solution before charging him. Again, the Feds need to convince a jury beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sam did this (not that it was done, that Sam did this)

People seem to thing we can let him sit in jail indefinitely pre-trial while we collect the documents and facts, but the Constitution is pretty aggressive about that and no-one even knows what happened yet (not even SBF per his own claims).

A prosecutor can't just point towards ambiguous bad things that happened, they need iron-clad facts that a defense team can't poke holes in (even if those holes are only a shadow of a doubt).

>plays a disappearing act.

I mean, sure, there's always flight risk, but to where? Russia? I mean it "worked" for Snowden I guess, but obviously different circumstances there.

China? They banned crypto, so I doubt they want him potentially stirring up economic tumult there.

Pretty much anywhere else? The US has an extradition treaty and I doubt SBF is going to settle into a quiet life of hiding given his current behavior.

>He's a billionaire

This is always such a funny thing people say about others. Liquidity matters. Even if Sam has access to hidden billions of liquid crypto, then what? He sells it in secret and secretly buys a yacht from a company that's not worried about having those funds seized by the US Gov't? He can't make any meaningful purchase, other than legal defense, because any counter-party will know that the funds are at risk for seizure (since they are ill-gotten).

It's the same as Putin, like sure Russia's national wealth is his, but what's he gonna spend it on? The palaces he already lives in?

And then by that measure, isn't the current US President probably the wealthiest person (Say what you will, but no amount of money is going to give MBS the power to launch a nuke if he wants).

>He is an extreme flight risk, yet the DoJ continues to hem and haw.

Again, can you really be a flight risk if you're already not in the US's jurisdiction?

This is exactly what I was going to point out. People seem to forget that these kinds of cases take a lot of time to build.