On September 13, FTX creator Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) submitted an interest reverse his last November conviction on scams and conspiracy charges.
In a 102-page filing, SBF’s legal group argued the trial was unreasonable, calling it a “sentence initially, decision later” scenario. They declared the judgment was hurried and prejudiced.
SBF’s Legal Team Claims He Was Presumed Guilty From the Outset
Led by lawyer Alexandra Shapiro, SBF’s legal representatives specified that he was never ever presumed innocent. They argued that everybody included, consisting of the judge, presumed his regret from the start.
“Sam Bankman-Fried was never ever presumed innocent. He was presumed guilty– before he was even charged. He was presumed guilty by the media. He was presumed guilty by the FTX debtor estate and its attorneys. He was presumed guilty by federal district attorneys excited for fast headings. And he was presumed guilty by the judge who commanded his trial,” the legal representatives regreted.
Learn more: FTX Collapse Explained: How Sam Bankman-Fried’s Empire Fell
The defense implicated United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan of predisposition, declaring he affected the trial’s result. Shapiro competed that Kaplan’s remarks throughout the trial recommended regret before the case had actually concluded. The defense likewise slammed the judge for limiting crucial arguments that might have shown SBF’s efforts to support FTX.
“Many of the judge’s judgments were not simply incorrect however out of balance– consistently putting a thumb on the scale to assist the federal government and ward off the defense. That is not all. The judge constantly mocked Bankman-Fried throughout trial, consistently slammed his temperament, and signified his shock of Bankman-Fried’s statement,” the legal representatives composed.
SBF’s legal group even more argued that the jury saw just “half the photo” concerning FTX user funds. They declared the prosecution misrepresented the case by depicting the funds as completely lost, while SBF supposedly triggered the loss purposefully.
“From the first day, the dominating story– at first spun by the attorneys who took control of FTX, rapidly embraced by their contacts at the United States Attorney’s Office– was that Bankman-Fried had actually taken billions of dollars of consumer funds, driven FTX to insolvency, and triggered billions in losses. Now, almost 2 years later on, an extremely various image is emerging– one validating FTX was never ever insolvent, and in truth had properties worth billions to repay its clients. The jury at Bankman Fried’s trial never ever got to see that photo,” the attorneys mentioned.
Bankman-Fried’s legal representatives likewise raised issues about Sullivan & & Cromwell’s function in the event. According to them, the law office– which at first functioned as FTX’s external legal counsel and later on became its lead personal bankruptcy company– mistakenly forced SBF to step down as CEO. The attorneys likewise argued that the law office intended to position complete blame on Bankman-Fried to divert attention from its own doubtful practices.
“Sullivan & & Cromwell– which billed numerous countless dollars in this case– carried out prosecutorial jobs that had absolutely nothing to do with insolvency.
2018, BidPixels