The former CEO of the now-bankrupt FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried, has appealed his fraud conviction and requested a new trial.
Bankman-Fried “was presumed guilty—before he was even charged,” his lawyers wrote in the 102-page brief filed on Friday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
“He was presumed guilty by the media. He was presumed guilty by the FTX debtor estate and its lawyers. He was presumed guilty by federal prosecutors eager for quick headlines. And he was presumed guilty by the judge who presided over his trial,” the brief states.
Bankman-Fried was the founder of cryptocurrency exchange FTX and sister trading firm Alameda Research.
The popular exchange suddenly collapsed in November 2022 and Bankman-Fried was accused of mismanaging the company.
According to federal prosecutors, he misappropriated billions of dollars of customer funds deposited with FTX, defrauded investors in FTX of more than $1.7 billion, and defrauded lenders to Alameda of more than $1.3 billion.
Following a monthlong trial, Bankman-Fried was found guilty on two counts of wire fraud, two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit commodities fraud, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering.
He was sentenced to 25 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and ordered to pay $11 billion in restitution.
“Samuel Bankman-Fried orchestrated one of the largest financial frauds in history, stealing over $8 billion of his customers’ money,” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams for the Southern District of New York said in a statement.
His lawyers maintained in the appeal that Bankman-Fried had illiquid investments to pay back customers but was never given a chance to present his side of the story.
The Appeal
The lawyers for Bankman-Fried said that he “had not lost or stolen all the money, and the investments he made were not risky or stupid.”
They added, “FTX faced a liquidity crisis, not a solvency crisis.”
They argued that Judge Lewis Kaplan prohibited the defense from introducing evidence of solvency in court but allowed the prosecutors to enter evidence of loss. The judge “continually ridiculed” the defendant, criticized his demeanor, and “signaled disbelief” at his testimony, lawyers wrote.
Bankman-Fried’s lawyers want a new trial under a different judge, arguing that the jury only saw “half the picture” and that the district court “made little pretense of objectivity or even-handedness,” according to the appeal.
What’s Next?
The U.S. Attorney’s Office is expected respond to the appeal in a written reply brief.
Meanwhile, former CEO of Alameda Research, Caroline Ellison, is set to be sentenced for her role in the scheme later this month.
NTD reached out to the U.S. Attorney’s Office but didn’t immediately hear back.