Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ463 | |
| 2 | Ṁ112 | |
| 3 | Ṁ88 | |
| 4 | Ṁ61 | |
| 5 | Ṁ34 |
From the Federal sentencing guidelines: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manual/2021/GLMFull.pdf
- Per section 3D (multiple counts), counts will be grouped (all involved a common scheme).
- Per section 3D, with 5 units of financial crimes, 5 levels of severity will be added.
- The base count, wire fraud, has a base severity of 7.
- Due to the amounts of money involved, 24 (fraud with damages >$64M) to 30 (fraud with damages >$550M) levels of severity are added.
- There are more than 10 victims, so add 2 levels of severity. If there were more than 25 victims with significant financial hardship, we would add 4 more levels of severity.
- There are more than $1M in gross receipts from a fianancial insitution, maybe? If so, add 2.
- One of the counts is conspiracy to commit securities fraud. Violations of securities law add 4 levels of severity.
- SBF is the manager or leader of an extensive fraud: add 4 levels of severity (under section 3B1.1).
The sum is minimum 5+7+24+2+4+4 = 46, maximum 5+7+30+6+2+4+4 = 58.
- Anything above a sentencing level of 43 has a minimum sentence of "life", which the market creator has commented will count as greater than any fixed amount of time.
Accordingly, the value of this market should be set roughly by the probability that SBF will be alive come sentencing, which is about 95%, per the SBF "Epstein" market.
@brp No comment on your Guidelines calculation--you might be right, but if you don't have federal sentencing experience you're probably missing things. (Federal district judges--who use them constantly--miscalculate the Guidelines all the time.) You also haven't accounted for the statutory maximums, which add up to ~110 years assuming everything runs consecutively. (That's of course functionally a life sentence, but a literal life sentence is actually impossible here.)
In any event, since 2005 the Guidelines have been discretionary / not binding on judges. Basically, the Guidelines are an important anchoring mechanism--judges are legally required to calculate the Guidelines range accurately before pronouncing sentence--but the Guidelines don't determine the ultimate sentence, particularly in a case like this. And judges are particularly likely to depart from the Guidelines when the calculation results in a really long sentence. So it's somewhat useful to know what that anchor is, but it would be a bad mistake to assume the Guidelines calculation should govern the value of this and related markets.
@brp (For what it's worth, you're also using an outdated version of the Guidelines--the most updated version, effective two days ago, will apply to SBF's case.)
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manual/2023/GLMFull.pdf