> Maybe this was the only way to ensure he testified
Nope, it doesn't make any sense to arrest him if the goal was to force him to testify in front of congress. Once he is placed under arrest then I'm pretty sure the house cannot make him testify if he is in custody, he becomes at the mercy of a judge and I imagine bail conditions will not allow him to talk in public about the case either.
Bail is a US thing for: when you're arrested and charged with a crime, you're not necessarily going to sit in jail until trial. You are either let go or you pay money (bail) to decrease the chance you'll flee. If you can't pay bail or bail is refused by the judge, you sit in jail.
SBF hasn't been charged yet. Bahamas arrested him for the sole purpose of preventing him from fleeing because U.S. indicated that they'll charge him and will want to extradite him to U.S.
I don't know if Bahamas even has a concept of bail but it doesn't apply here and wouldn't make sense to let him out.
Bail is definitely not just a US thing, in fact a quick search brings up details of how bail works in the Bahamas.
That said, bail does seem unlikely in this case.
People in jail and prison testify in court all the time. They are transported to and from the court by guards, have a guard assigned to them in the courtroom, and sometimes testify in prison uniforms etc.
I don't know why a house subpoena would be any different.
If you are out on bail, I have never heard of bail conditions restricting what someone can say, that's not what bail is, I don't think that's even a thing. Judges in the case do sometimes put "gag orders" on the parties involved, but that's not related to bail.
Where are you getting this information?
He's perhaps unlikely to be testifying to the house tomorrow though, when he's been arrested in the bahamas. Probably just as a practical matter he needs to be extradicted to US custody and processed first.
> People in jail and prison testify in court all the time.
I think the point the GP is trying to make is that his arrest does not obligate him to testify in front of anyone: his "right to remain silent" and all that. Prior to being arrested, voluntarily testifying (or complying with a subpoena to do so) before Congress could have been useful to him if he could manipulate things well enough to get the heat turned down. (I don't think he'd actually be successful at that, but that's another story.)
Now that he's in jail, he may actually listen to the advice I'm sure his lawyer has been giving him all along: shut the hell up. And he's perfectly within his rights to do that. Even if he is hauled before Congress, he can simply assert his 5th Amendment rights after every question, and that might actually be the best move for him now.
Edit: re-reading the GP, I realize what you were objecting to, the "I'm pretty sure the house cannot make him testify if he is in custody" bit; I agree with you in that I don't think that's the case. Still, though, even if Congress can force him to testify, they can't actually force him to answer questions. They technically couldn't do that before, but now that he's been arrested it's likely even less in his best interests to talk.
He wasn't arrested by the US government (or US state government), the Bahamas arrested him after the DOJ said they were pressing charges and likely to request extradition.
As for flight risk the Bahamas had previously confiscated his passport and he wasn't able to get himself smuggled out in the last 2 weeks so he doesn't appear hugely flighty, but then again knowing that he's being formally charged may change that.
Nope, it doesn't make any sense to arrest him if the goal was to force him to testify in front of congress. Once he is placed under arrest then I'm pretty sure the house cannot make him testify if he is in custody, he becomes at the mercy of a judge and I imagine bail conditions will not allow him to talk in public about the case either.