[bena]

While it is likely true that they are likely leveraging assets acquired through his fraud to post bail, legally, we have to give them the benefit of the doubt. The only way I can think of that they wouldn't be allowed is if the assets themselves were evidence in the crimes. And there's also the murky bit where the house itself wasn't fraudulently purchased, so if SBF is found guilty and he must pay back all the money, if they were able to come up with the money through other means, they could keep the house.

Next, they aren't using a bondsman. I doubt any bondsman has $250 million to dedicate to this for any length of time.

And they are allowed to wait "in freedom" because bail was posted on their behalf. Those are the rules of the system.

[dragonwriter]

> While it is likely true that they are likely leveraging assets acquired through his fraud to post bail

The only asset pledged is their Palo Alto house, their ownership of which I believe predates any alleged fraud of SBFs.