FTX exec who turned on Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 7.5 years in prison

Ryan Salame, a former executive of FTX under Sam Bankman-Fried, has been sentenced to 7.5 years in prison, with an additional three years of supervised release. He is also required to pay over $6 million in forfeiture and $5 million in restitution. This sentence exceeds the 5-7 years suggested by prosecutors and the 18 months requested by Salame's defense. Salame had pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges related to unlawful political contributions and operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business.

The judge's decision to impose a more severe sentence on Salame than the prosecutors' recommendation could be attributed to several factors. While the exact reasoning of the judge in this case is not explicitly mentioned in the provided information, we can infer some possible reasons based on the general principles of sentencing.

1. Seriousness of the Offense: The judge may have considered the gravity of Salame's offenses - conspiracy to make unlawful political contributions, defraud the Federal Election Commission, and conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business - as warranting a more severe punishment than what the prosecutors suggested.

2. Impact on Public Trust: The U.S. attorney Damian Williams stated that Salame's involvement in these crimes "undermined public trust in American elections and the integrity of the financial system." The judge may have taken into account the significant impact of Salame's actions on public trust and confidence in key institutions, justifying a harsher sentence.

3. Role in the Crime: Salame's position as a top lieutenant of Sam Bankman-Fried might have led the judge to believe that he played a significant role in the crimes and therefore deserved a more severe punishment.

4. Lack of Cooperation: It's also worth noting that Salame did not take the stand during Bankman-Fried's trial, which may have influenced the judge's decision. If the judge viewed this as a lack of cooperation or remorse, it could have resulted in a harsher sentence.

5. Judicial Discretion: Ultimately, sentencing decisions lie within the discretion of the judge, who has the responsibility to impose a sentence that they believe is fair and appropriate based on the facts of the case and the applicable sentencing laws. The judge may have simply determined that a longer sentence was warranted in this case, despite the prosecutors' recommendation.

Remember, these are just possible reasons. The exact rationale behind the judge's decision would be detailed in the judge's sentencing statement.