> The guy broke the law to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars, and he gets to sit around at home while waiting for trial. He is with his family, living however he wants. Eating great food, drinking, relaxing. Enjoying himself.
He hasn't been convicted of a crime. Why should he be in jail?
> Regular criminals who break the law to the tune of hundreds of dollars are forced to sit in jail while they wait for trial. Jail sucks. You do NOT get to enjoy yourself.
It sounds like you support bail reform then, which has been a big thing recently in California and New York!
> That's the point.
The point absolutely is NOT to imprison people who have not been convicted of a crime. The point is to imprison people who have been convicted of a crime, and then maybe also temporarily imprison people pre-trial if they pose an imminent threat to the community (which SBF does not).
He hasn't been convicted of a crime. Why should he be in jail?
> Regular criminals who break the law to the tune of hundreds of dollars are forced to sit in jail while they wait for trial. Jail sucks. You do NOT get to enjoy yourself.
It sounds like you support bail reform then, which has been a big thing recently in California and New York!
> That's the point.
The point absolutely is NOT to imprison people who have not been convicted of a crime. The point is to imprison people who have been convicted of a crime, and then maybe also temporarily imprison people pre-trial if they pose an imminent threat to the community (which SBF does not).