FTX Co-Founder Sam Bankman-Fried Seeks Retrial, Alleges Legal Errors

Sam Bankman-Fried’s Appeal Targets Conviction Over Alleged Legal Missteps

In an appeal filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Sam Bankman-Fried‘s legal team asserts that the district court made several critical errors during his trial. Among these, they argue, was the improper exclusion of evidence intended to show that Bankman-Fried believed FTX was solvent at the time of its collapse, and that he acted in good faith. According to the appeal, the court’s decision to block this defense evidence while allowing the prosecution to present evidence of losses misled the jury into believing FTX customers’ funds were permanently lost.

The court filing states:

The government thus presented a false narrative that FTX’s customers, lenders, and investors had permanently lost their money. The jury was only allowed to see half the picture.

Bankman-Fried’s attorneys, led by Alexandra Shapiro, further contend that the court wrongfully excluded his testimony that he relied on the advice of counsel when making business decisions at FTX. The appeal outlines that this exclusion prevented Bankman-Fried from defending himself against allegations that he knowingly engaged in fraudulent activities. “The jury was only allowed to see half the picture,” Shapiro argues in the brief, referencing the exclusion of evidence that would have supported the defendant’s narrative.

The appeal also raises concerns about the district court’s handling of jury instructions. Bankman-Fried’s legal team claims the court misled the jury by lowering the government’s burden of proof regarding his intent to defraud. According to the appeal, the instructions improperly suggested that Bankman-Fried could be convicted without the government proving that he intended to cause financial losses.

Shapiro explains:

The jury instructions either watered down or eliminated these elements. These errors, especially when considered together with the errors discussed above, require reversal … Instead, the court erroneously instructed the jury that in effect, no intended loss is required.

Finally, Bankman-Fried’s legal team challenges the forfeiture judgment that demands $11 billion in restitution. They argue that the statute used to authorize the judgment does not permit such sweeping financial penalties, especially when the defendant had no intent to permanently deprive FTX customers of their funds. The appeal calls for a new trial under a different judge to ensure impartiality and a fair hearing.

What do you think about Bankman-Fried’s appeal? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.