The names of the bond backers were released today: Santos’ father and aunt.
I’m not sure I understand this:
Neither relative secured the bond with cash or property, according to a court order that was among the documents unsealed Thursday. But Santos’ father and aunt “agreed to be personally responsible” for the congressman’s compliance with the terms of his release, the order noted.
Is that typical, that someone can secure bond without putting up any money or assets?
So why was Santos so concerned about their names being revealed? If one was the sort of person who would harass Santos’s family for bailing him out of jail, I think one would have to be the sort of person who would harass them for just being part of his family.
Perhaps Santos wanted to create the impression he had powerful people supporting him from the shadows rather than revealing he was being bailed out by his family.
Santos just widened the list of known named suspects to 3. And their “friends”. And those “friends” “friends”. Dirty business has a lot of connections that are best left off the roiling rumor-mill part of the internet.
He went from penny ante crimes like kiting checks, scamming puppies, to suddenly having wealth beyond normal means (loaning his campaign $700,000). Later said money actually came from somewhere else, somehow, who knows, obscurity ensues.
Not to worry, the House ethics committee will be getting right on it.
Thanks for the link, but I don’t see how Santos lands in the unsecured bail bond area. Unless he got that just because he’s a member of Congress. Because to my reading he fails all 3 criteria listed for unsecured bail. Or I’m just an ol’ meanie.
A Santos court conference scheduled for today was postponed to continue discussions “of a path forward,” according to the NY Times.
Representative George Santos has entered talks with federal prosecutors about “possible paths forward” in his fraud case, an indication that the parties may be considering a plea deal.
In a letter filed on Tuesday, prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York notified the judge that they intended this week to file a batch of new evidence against Mr. Santos, a Republican representing parts of Long Island and Queens.
In their request to delay a court conference set for Thursday, prosecutors wrote that they anticipated making “another substantial production” of evidence this week and wanted to give Mr. Santos time to review the material.
They added that the parties “have continued to discuss possible paths forward in this matter,” and would need “additional time to continue those discussions.” They asked that the status conference be pushed to Oct. 27.
Could reality be settling in as prosecutors pile on more evidence against him? (Narrator: “Probably not.”)