Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of FTX, will finally have just one day to prepare his defence on the latest charge against him, while he is currently in prison awaiting trial. At the same time, his lawyers have filed new documents affirming that he acted “in good faith” during his activity at FTX.
Judge toughens tone against Sam Bankman-Fried
A week after being taken into custody for attempted witness tampering, Sam Bankman-Fried and his legal team asked Judge Lewis Kaplan, in charge of the FTX case, if the former exchange CEO could be granted the right to go out 5 times a week to prepare his defence.
In a very succinct document, the judge finally granted Sam Bankman-Fried the right to go out only on today’s date, i.e. Tuesday 22 August. Specifically, the accused will have 5 and a half hours to prepare his defence alongside his lawyers on the latest charge against him.
While Sam Bankman-Fried had seen his charge of illegal campaign financing dropped, these charges have now been reinstated in the final count at the time of writing, namely his attempt to intimidate Caroline Ellison, who has agreed to testify against him at his trial to be held in October.
As regards the request from SBF’s lawyers, the judge ultimately granted only a limited agreement: while they had asked for 2 laptops connected to the Internet to prepare their client’s defence, Lewis Kaplan decided that one was sufficient. At the same time, all the other requests made by Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyers were rejected.
Hints about the trial of the former FTX CEO?
Yesterday, Monday, August 21, U.S. prosecutors filed a lengthy, one-hundred-page document with the court proposing instructions on how the Sam Bankman-Fried trial should be divided. The 7 charges against the former FTX CEO were broken down so that they could be dealt with in detail.
A total of 69 motions will have to be reviewed by the judge, who will have the final say on how he instructs the jury.
Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyers also submitted their own documents, in which they said the various allegations against him were more akin to errors of judgement and mismanagement rather than crimes.
Recently, the former billionaire attempted to defend himself against accusations of witness tampering by saying that he had only followed the “advice of a lawyer”, and that it was therefore not directly his fault.