Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the founder of cryptocurrency exchange FTX, was convicted of seven counts of fraud and conspiracy and was sentenced to 25 years in prison in March this year. However, he refused to accept the conviction and sentence and formally appealed on September 13. He asked for a retrial and accused the judge in charge of the case of being "unfairly biased" against him.
In November last year, one year after FTX filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, SBF was convicted of two counts of wire fraud, four counts of conspiracy to commit fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. "All seven counts were found guilty"; this year In March, Judge Lewis Kaplan of the District Court for the Southern District of New York sentenced him to 25 years in prison and fined him $11 billion.
In this regard, SBF formally appealed to the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals last Friday. Defense lawyer Alexandra Shapiro pointed out in the 102-page appeal that during the trial of the case, the presiding judge Lewis Kaplan had a wrong attitude towards the founder of FTX. Fair, often making "vitriolic remarks" that weakened the defense's arguments, and in addition to preventing the defense team from submitting certain evidence, even "ridiculed" SBF's testimony in front of the jury.
"Sam Bankman-Fried was never presumed innocent," Alexandra Shapiro wrote in the filing. "The judge in the case found him guilty from the outset."
Alexandra Shapiro said that the judge prevented the defense from providing sufficient evidence to prove that "FTX and Alameda Research are solvent":
SBF did not lose or steal all of his money, and the investments he made were not risky or stupid. Many of these investments, such as his $500 million investment in Anthropic and his investment in Solana, were prescient, but lacked liquidity and could not be immediately converted into cash, so they failed to satisfy customers in November 2022. Bank runs with collective withdrawals. FTX is facing a liquidity crisis, not a solvency crisis.
Alexandra Shapiro also mentioned that SBF could have testified that "he relied on the advice of lawyers on certain business matters," but the court did not allow him to testify to this effect.
The appeal said: "Had the judge allowed the defense to introduce evidence, all this could have been proven at trial. The prejudice caused by this error can be summed up simply: the prosecution was allowed to present an objectively wrong point, while the defense Refutation is not allowed."
In addition, Alexandra Shapiro also argued that Judge Lewis Kaplan often expressed his distaste for SBF and accused him of "manipulating the judicial scale" in favor of the prosecution by providing free dinners, pick-up services, etc., and "improperly urging jurors The group made a ruling that night, thus affecting the outcome of the trial.
"Accusing the judge of "tampering with the judicial scale" in favor of the prosecutor! SBF files an appeal and requests a retrial> This article was first published on "Blocker".
