Sam Bankman-Fried Appeals Fraud Conviction, Requests New Trial: NYT

In November last year, a jury in New York found Sam Bankman-Fried guilty on seven charges related to fraud and conspiracy due to the collapse of his cryptocurrency exchange in November 2022. Later in March, Judge Lewis Kaplan from the Southern District of New York (SDNY) handed down a sentence of 25 years imprisonment for these offenses.

As an analyst, I’d rephrase it as follows: In the 102-page appeal submitted on Friday afternoon, my legal team has asserted that Judge Kaplan exhibited bias towards FTX’s founder during the trial. They claim that he made critical remarks that weakened our defense case and disparaged my testimony in front of the jury.

In a court document, Sam Bankman-Fried’s attorney, Alexandra Shapiro, stated that Bankman-Fried was not automatically considered innocent. Instead, it was the judge in the trial who assumed him to be guilty.

32-year-old Sam Bankman-Fried’s legal team proposed a more lenient sentence of 6.5 years, while the government advocated for a significantly longer term of incarceration, ranging from 40 to 50 years behind bars.

In his recent trial, a number of Bankman-Fried’s close associates such as Caroline Ellison (his former partner), Nishad Singh, Gary Wang, and Ryan Salame, provided testimony against him and admitted to their own charges of fraud. Salame has already been given a 7.5 year prison sentence in May. Ellison awaits sentencing this month and has requested no jail time.

Sam Bankman-Fried’s defense strategy, as well as his basis for potential appeal, has been primarily centered around the customer recoveries made by the FTX estate. He maintains that the exchange was not truly insolvent, and alleges that he was coerced into filing for bankruptcy prematurely by the estate management team, which includes John J. Ray III as turnaround CEO and Sullivan & Cromwell as their white-shoe law firm.

In his argument, Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyer expressed disagreement with Judge Kaplan’s decision that prevented Bankman-Fried from asserting to the jury that FTX users hadn’t truly suffered a financial loss, as they were anticipated to be reimbursed during the bankruptcy proceedings.

As a researcher, I’d rephrase it as follows: “I contend that the government portrayed an inaccurate account, suggesting that FTX’s users, creditors, and investors had irretrievably lost their funds. However, the court only allowed a partial perspective to be presented.