United States v. BANKMAN-FRIED (FTX collapse/fraud)

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.

Please have a look around and if you like what you see, please consider registering an account and joining the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

Ben Armstrong, a popular crypto influencer who goes by the name Bitboy Crypto on YouTube, failed to appear in court for an ongoing case involving FTX, a now-defunct cryptocurrency exchange. Armstrong is a former influencer for FTX, and the case involves allegations of deceptive practices by the exchange and its affiliates. However, Armstrong’s absence from the court has resulted in severe consequences, including potential criminal charges of harassment and contempt of court.

 
May 9 (Reuters) - Indicted FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried has renewed his attacks on the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange’s law firm as he mounts his defense against a raft of fraud, money laundering and campaign finance charges.

 
NEW YORK (Reuters) -U.S. prosecutors on Wednesday asked a judge to hold a separate trial for Sam Bankman-Fried, the indicted founder of now-bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX, who faces new charges of foreign bribery, bank fraud and conspiracy.

Prosecutors added those charges this year, after Bankman-Fried's December 2022 extradition from the Bahamas in the wake of FTX's collapse. An initial eight-count indictment accused the one-time billionaire of stealing billions of dollars from FTX customers and lying to investors and lenders.

 
NEW YORK, June 27 (Reuters) - A federal judge on Tuesday rejected Sam Bankman-Fried's bid to throw out most of the U.S. government's criminal case accusing the FTX cryptocurrency exchange founder of orchestrating a multibillion-dollar fraud.

 
The U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) filed a new complaint against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) on Thursday, accusing him of leaking the private diary of former Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison in an effort to discredit her as a witness.

In a new court filing submitted by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams on July 20, the DoJ accused Bankman-Fried of sharing Ellison’s journal and other personal writings with a New York Times reporter for an article published on Thursday, characterizing the leak as an “attempt to interfere with a fair trial by an impartial jury.”
...

 
  • Federal prosecutors told a Manhattan judge they wouldn’t pursue a campaign finance charge against FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried.
  • It’s the second time Manhattan prosecutors have had to forgo charging the billionaire, who is accused of precipitating the collapse of his crypto exchange through a multibillion-dollar fraud.
 
  • Sam Bankman-Fried will head to jail on Friday, after a judge sided with a request by federal prosecutors to revoke the FTX founder’s bail over alleged witness tampering.
  • Bankman-Fried will be remanded to custody directly from a court hearing in New York, where he will remain ahead of his criminal trial – which is due to begin on Oct. 2.
 
...
The process of jury selection – voir dire, or “to speak the truth” – heated up late last week after government lawyers blasted the defense team’s proposed questions. A good number of them could influence potential jurors, they argued in a letter to Judge Lewis Kaplan. Some were too prying, others too specific, the feds said. A handful “are a thinly veiled attempt to advance a defense narrative,” the government claimed. Many of the questions they took umbrage with shared a common theme. They were about appearances.

Sam Bankman-Fried is (or was?) a master of appearances. From the first time this author spotted the sneakers and shorts-wearing, wild-haired billionaire on a yacht in Miami (circa June 2021) to his final television interviews preceding his arrest, the crypto wunderkind cultivated perceptions. He shuffled between personas that bolstered this image of approachable greatness. Sam was the guy you could trust to get it right even though he couldn’t tie his dress shoes.

“I think it’s important for people to think I look crazy,” the government quoted Sam as saying. His “crazy” (playing video games during interviews, dressing like a dorm room schlub, sleeping on a beanbag chair and, oh yeah, those disheveled curls) made his greatness (speaking on Capitol Hill, pioneering massive philanthropic endeavors and, oh yeah, the crypto exchange FTX) all the greater.

But the government doesn’t want to let the defense highlight any of that before the trial begins. They’re calling on Judge Kaplan to reject jury questions that probe the righteousness of philanthropic philosophies and campaign finance. Sam’s ADHD should be left off the table, they say. And don’t even think about interrogating jurors’ FTX-specific opinions.

Real or engineered, Sam’s game of perceptions has ended. He’ll begin the trial as a well-dressed defendant just like any other. The government doesn't want his old image to dictate who might eventually put him in a khaki jumpsuit.
...
Sam Bankman-Fried’s trial begins at 9:30 a.m. ET (13:30 UTC) on Tuesday, Oct. 3, 2023, at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

 
Yesterday was arguably not a great day for Sam Bankman-Fried. First, the judge overseeing his case rejected all seven of his proposed expert witnesses*, questioning at least one’s qualifications and saying some others really wouldn’t be relevant to the case.

Shortly after, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Bankman-Fried’s appeal of Judge Lewis Kaplan’s ruling to revoke his release on bail.
...
... the DOJ plans to call witnesses as soon as the week of Oct. 3, ...

More:

 
We need to set up Arenas like in Imperial Rome. All the crooks of any level, from vote-stuffer to Biden.

All in the Arena at once.

Armament:

Level 1 Crimes (vote stuffer, School Board Pornographer, etc.) <-- Swords, spears

Level 2 Crimes (looting, carjacking, etc.) <-- baseball bats, Hi-Power Slingshots

Subsequent level Armaments grade downward to

Level 5 Crimes <-- Golf clubs

Level 7 Crimes <-- Golf balls

Level 10 Crimes (Biden, Schiff, Comey, Wray, etc.) <-- Badminton raquets, ping-pong paddles

Last one alive gets to go free. (No food, water, First Aid, etc. until only just ONE is alive.)
 
I'd have trouble honoring that last.

I see no reason to honor bargains with thieves and liars.
 
It'd always be some, single, generally useless sword-bearer. Turn him loose, and see how he does in the world without all those enabling him, and NO ONE to give him so much as free spit.

Nah. It'd be a good system. We Watchers have one on Aldebaran IV.
 
The next chapter in the fall of one-time crypto billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried is set to begin Tuesday as the former FTX head goes on trial in New York City.

Jury selection in Bankman-Fried's trial is scheduled to begin Oct. 3, while the trial itself is expected to last about six weeks.

 
Watched this last night. IMO...........it's pretty good. Laughed out loud when I heard Fried talk. My fav was hen he offered Trump 5 bil not to run.

Rise, fall of Sam Bankman-Fried, FTX at center of Michael Lewis' new book | 60 Minutes​

Oct 2, 2023

26:49
 
The absence of a clear U.S. legal framework for crypto is no bar for pressing fraud charges against FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, the Department of Justice said in a filing published early Wednesday morning.

Bankman-Fried’s trial began Tuesday. Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty to allegations he misappropriated customer funds from FTX.

Meanwhile lawyers from both the sides are still sparring over what evidence the as-yet-unselected jury will be able to hear. The prosecutors are now fighting claims, reiterated by Bankman-Fried on Monday, that the regulatory status of crypto exchanges is relevant.

 
Lulz. That's certainly an interesting legal strategy. Regulatory status doesn't really have anything to do with whether or not fraud was committed.
 
FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s entire crypto empire was a “house of cards” that was “built on a lie,” the U.S. Department of Justice said in its opening statement at the FTX founder’s trial.

Bankman-Fried’s defense team countered that the onetime FTX founder acted in good faith – even as his businesses grew too quickly and collapsed dramatically through no fault of his own, his lawyers said. They assigned some of the blame to one of his employees, his former paramour Caroline Ellison, and said she failed to install safeguards. Ellison has already pleaded guilty and will testify during the trial.
...

more:


Some of FTX's employees in the U.S. knew about the backdoor in the exchange that allowed Alameda Research to withdraw billions in customer funds, according to a Wall Street Journal report on Thursday.

The employees flagged their discovery to FTX's director of engineering Nishad Singh but the problem never got fixed, the WSJ reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

The team, who worked for LedgerX, the crypto derivatives exchange that FTX acquired in 2021, was examining whether the code for FTX's main exchange could be used in the U.S when they made the discovery.

LedgerX's chief risk officer Julie Schoening raised the concerns to her boss Zach Dexter, who then discussed it with Nishad Singh, one of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried's closest deputies.

Schoening was fired in August 2022, amid suggestions she had irritated her bosses over highlighting the problems.
...

more:


More coverage of the trial posted here:

 
This case is officially "United States v. BANKMAN-FRIED (1:22-cr-00673)" and details of the trial (process) can be found here:

 
Some reporting on day 2 of the trial:

...
Therein lies the altruist. Sam styled himself a champion of the “effective altruist” movement, an offshoot of utilitarianism whose proponents seek to make as much money as possible and then give it to causes that might save the world. That was how Sam did it, at least. For a time, his crypto empire appeared to be rocketing the quirky quant toward maximum philanthropic velocity. He’d already started giving massive sums to politicians, charities and pet causes he thought could save humanity from itself.

(It came at the cost of his customers, according to prosecutors as well as “Enron John” Ray III. The crisis-era CEO of now-bankrupt FTX Group has spent the past 11 months on a highly lucrative global treasure hunt to claw back millions of donated dollars to make FTX customers whole.)
...
Judge Lewis Kaplan continues to express his respect for the attorneys trying the case – but still wound up almost mocking lead defense counsel Mark Cohen on Wednesday after he objected to Ellison saying she “believes” former FTX executive Nishad Singh told her that offsetting ledger entries in FTX and Alameda’s books were meant for auditors.

“I believe this is Wednesday. I believe this is Wednesday. That’s not speculation. Overruled!” the judge said, getting the ruling in as Cohen said “withdrawn.”

He appeared to be losing his patience with the prosecution as well, chiding Department of Justice attorneys across Tuesday and Wednesday for mislabeled exhibits and seeming exasperated with their extensive focus on spreadsheets.
...
Caroline Ellison has one more day on the stand, facing defense attorney Mark Cohen as he continues his cross-examination.

He only had a few moments with Ellison on Wednesday, trying to ask a question about FTX’s fiat account and how it tracked its funds – however, after some initial back-and-forth, it was clear he and Ellison were on slightly different pages about how different accounts were referenced, culminating in the best objection I’ve heard so far this trial.

“Objection Your Honor, this is confusing!” Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon said. ...
...


1. Sam should have been a politician - he thinks he knows best how to spend other people's money.

2. Trial sounds like a borderline shitshow.

3. Maybe the best objection I've ever heard.
 
NEW YORK — Sam Bankman-Fried began testifying at his criminal trial Thursday without jurors present, an unusual move by the judge who wanted to review the comments first to see if they're admissible.

Even though jurors weren't there to hear him, Bankman-Fried's first performance on the witness stand – delivered while he was under oath – was remarkable.

The FTX founder's decision to testify is risky. While Bankman-Fried has tried to frame the collapse of his multi-billion-dollar FTX crypto exchange as an unavoidable accident – he gave interviews to reporters, started a Substack newsletter and tweeted to downplay his culpability after his company filed for bankruptcy in November 2022 – he has exposed himself to tough questioning from prosecutors.

 
...
Sassoon’s cross-examination evisceration of the alleged crypto fraudster was hard to watch.

Determined to highlight inconsistencies in the former crypto chief’s alternate history, the assistant U.S. attorney leveraged his prolific history of tweeting, interviewing and testifying before Congress about FTX’s purported greatness and safeness.

She wanted to catch Bankman-Fried in a lie. After four hours she’d at least gotten the next-best thing: evidence he’s is a VERY unreliable narrator.

“Would you agree that you know how to tell a good story?” Sassoon asked Bankman-Fried early on, prompting someone in the gallery to guffaw.

Bankman-Fried audibly bristled at Sassoon’s tactics. He taunted her in a sing-songy cadence when told to read FTX materials that contradicted him. His unyielding “yeps” started low on the y and finished high on the p. He spent most of cross-examination repeating variations of “I don’t know” (16 times) like “sounds plausible” (twice) “I may have” (17 times), “I don’t recall” (27 times) and “I’m not confident” (three times), when asked about his own words.

“I can explain it, if you want,” Bankman-Fried offered on a handful of occasions where Sassoon forced him to accede into damning characterizations. She never took him up on it.

His responses weren’t always responses. Judge Lewis Kaplan reprimanded Bankman-Fried for avoiding prosecutor questions and interjecting his own. His gaze stayed mostly on Sassoon, but sometimes he darted to the jury box.

There, 17 pairs of eyes may have shot back a mix of skepticism and, by the end of the day, boredom and perhaps a bit of despair. Some jurors were growing visibly tired of Bankman-Fried’s waffling “I don’t remember” defense after four weeks of trial. A few new sleepyheads drifted off.
...
She’ll go for another two hours of cross-examination Tuesday.

 
Apparently, SBF's defense attempted to pin it all on Caroline Ellison, but as quirky as she may seem, she testified that anything she did was at the behest of SBF...

and she had the receipts to prove it!
 
NEW YORK, Nov 2 (Reuters) - Sam Bankman-Fried's fraud trial has given an unprecedented window into how a group of graduates from elite U.S. universities in their late 20s and early 30s tried, and ultimately failed, to avert one of the biggest and swiftest corporate meltdowns ever.

Now, the 31-year-old former billionaire's fate could hinge on how jurors view his actions in the 10 days before the FTX cryptocurrency exchange's collapse nearly one year ago.

 
A jury has found FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried guilty on all charges in his federal fraud and conspiracy trial.

The jury deliberated for a little over four hours before reaching a verdict on Thursday.

"We will have decorum in the courtroom when the verdict is announced," Judge Lewis Kaplan said before the reading.

 
He was out of jail for quite awhile at his parents. These people always think they're going to beat the charges. Not sure why. He should have gone to a non extradition country. He still had the resources.
 
He was out of jail for quite awhile at his parents. These people always think they're going to beat the charges. Not sure why. He should have gone to a non extradition country. He still had the resources.
He thought he'd beat the charges because of the billions of dollars he'd given the ruling party.

And in fact, he probably will. Either overturning on appeal, or a soft sentence...in any event, he didn't get what most billion-dollar thieves would get, a bullet in the back of the head.

That's a win.
 
I reckon he’s the fall guy .
he wasn’t smart enough to create a machine that attracted and moved money like fix ended up doing .
probably more like Zelensky in appearing to be in charge but tightly controlled.

Perhaps his reluctance to tell the full story is in exchange for a new identity after a sad suicide end in jail ……
 
Ya never know how characters like Fried will do in jail. From everything I've heard, B Madoff did ok. He was a crooks crook.

Hey Bernie........teach me how to invest (make money.)

Yo Sam.............teach me about crypto, I'm done with armed robberies.
 
The decision to avoid a second trial charging Sam Bankman-Fried with a conspiracy to make unlawful political donations and bribery of foreign officials has many conservatives up in arms.

Federal prosecutors said Friday that they do not plan to proceed with a second trial against Sam Bankman-Fried, citing public interest in a speedy resolution of the case that has seemingly irritated those who were hoping to see the disgraced FTX founder prosecuted to the fullest extent.

In a Friday letter filed in federal court in Manhattan, prosecutors said they do "not plan to proceed with a second trial" as "much of the evidence that would be offered in a second trial was already offered in the first trial and can be considered by the Court at the defendant’s March 2024 sentencing."
...
The decision by prosecutors not to hold a second trial against Bankman-Fried quickly drew backlash from those who had followed the case.

"So we won’t know which politicians he bribed or who’s campaigns he influenced? That collective sigh of relief you are hearing is from the DEEP STATE," Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., wrote in a Friday night post to X.

Conservative commentator John Cardillo also weighed in on the announcement from prosecutors, accusing the Department of Justice of shielding Democrats from being named as recipients of Bankman-Fried donations.

"Sam Bankman-Fried will not face second trial," Cardillo wrote in an X post. "DOJ is protecting his Dem donation recipients."

CryptoLaw founder John Deaton, who has consistently commented on Bankman-Fried's case, slammed the decision by prosecutors as a "disgrace."

"The DOJ has shown again, that it is NOT an independent agency," Deaton said on X. "Who is the Attorney General protecting?"
...

 
Back
Top Bottom