I think you grossly underestimate the amount of regulation Caroline is subject to.
At the very least she will be deemed unfit or proper, which means she will be barred from any financial activity for the years to come.
On top of that, as a MOO & RO she will be professionally and personally liable to millions in fines, and most likely jail time.
Negligence _is_ a crime, a lack of means _is_ a crime, a lack of knowledge or control are crimes as well, for any regulated person, especially at the MOO/RO level, a lack of chinese wall between investment and retail is a crime, accepting money from an unverified source is akin to money laundering for an investment firm.
Edit:
MOO, ROs (responsible officers) and MICs (managers in charge) are regulated activities that should be assigned to individuals performing specific duties in an investment fund. Each regulator will have different names and variations on their duties and structure, but overall it's pretty much aligned.
It is mandatory for a regulated firm to have a specific amount and hierarchy of these regulated activities, and each one of them comes with a set of duties.
These activities are the main vector by which regulators enforce and control individual managers.
MOO is often assigned to the CEO. ROs are often the key investment officers, and MICs are often the key tech & operation officers.
Edit2: Hedge funds are no less regulated than any other investment firm. You are mixing "prop shops"/"family offices" and hedge funds.
Alameda was definitely an asset manager as it received external funds and was selling (debt) securities.
She was in charge a hedge fund. Hedge funds are allowed to trade badly and lose money. It happens all the time. There is a VERY high bar for negligence. Alameda Research was also located in the Bahamas. Did Alameda even have outside investors? It was basically SBF's family office. Caroline isn't likely to be liable for much unless she knowingly conspired to commit crimes.
Hedge funds are not exempt from having to know where their money is coming from. A hedge fund that works knowingly using drug money will have people go to jail. A hedge fund that doesn't do any amount of KYC will have people go to jail.
Hedge funds are not magic places where you can say teehee i just used money I found
My understanding is that she was the CEO of Alameda and received a loan from FTX based on garbage collateral. That’s not a crime? SBF knew the collateral was junk, so it’s not misrepresentation. Was she also an officer of FTX? A good chunk of those customer funds were from margin accounts that could be loaned out, so it may be hard to prove she knew SBF was dipping into the forbidden cookie jar, especially when there were no real FTX financials and it all seemed to be in SBF’s head.
I’m not saying she’s fully innocent, maybe there’s some incriminating text messages or something, but from the public information so far it doesn’t seem cut and dry to convict her of a serious crime.
There are very strict rules for any regulated firm about the provenance of the funds, ultimate beneficiaries, client-assumed risk, KYC, etc.
These are not only for customer protection, but anti money laundering as well.
Small regulators often overlook the client risk part so as to attract foreign money (that's why most of these regulators will be OK with little to no restriction of derivatives). The anti money laundering part though is very important for these small regulators as they could be fined internationally and don't want the bad publicity.
You cannot just "accept money and trust its from a legitimate source".
At the very least she will be deemed unfit or proper, which means she will be barred from any financial activity for the years to come.
On top of that, as a MOO & RO she will be professionally and personally liable to millions in fines, and most likely jail time.
Negligence _is_ a crime, a lack of means _is_ a crime, a lack of knowledge or control are crimes as well, for any regulated person, especially at the MOO/RO level, a lack of chinese wall between investment and retail is a crime, accepting money from an unverified source is akin to money laundering for an investment firm.
Edit: MOO, ROs (responsible officers) and MICs (managers in charge) are regulated activities that should be assigned to individuals performing specific duties in an investment fund. Each regulator will have different names and variations on their duties and structure, but overall it's pretty much aligned.
It is mandatory for a regulated firm to have a specific amount and hierarchy of these regulated activities, and each one of them comes with a set of duties.
These activities are the main vector by which regulators enforce and control individual managers.
MOO is often assigned to the CEO. ROs are often the key investment officers, and MICs are often the key tech & operation officers.
Edit2: Hedge funds are no less regulated than any other investment firm. You are mixing "prop shops"/"family offices" and hedge funds.
Alameda was definitely an asset manager as it received external funds and was selling (debt) securities.