- Bankman-Fried’s arbitration group contends that the judge’s prejudice influenced the proceeding’s fairness.
- The defence claims crucial evidence that could support Bankman-Fried was not allowed.
- The complaint also criticises the role of his company’s legal counsel in the proceedings.
SBF, the previous CEO of FTX, is asking for a new lawsuit after being found guilty of theft and money laundering. His argument group asserts that U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan showed bias during the examination, which they believe led to an unfair outcome. Fried received a 25-year prison term and was told to forfeit $11 billion. His team argues that the magistrator’s actions unfairly influenced the jury’s decision.
Claims of Judicial Bias
Bankman-Fried’s appeal focusses on accusations that Justice Kaplan displayed bias throughout the hearing. The accused team argues that he went on to ridicule Bankman-Fried’s behaviour and did not believe his testimony. These actions, they say, created an atmosphere that could have influenced the jury against Bankman-Fried.
The defence also claims that Justice Kaplan mocked the team, further impacting the fairness of the trial. They argue that this pattern of behaviour by the judge is enough to justify a new inquiry with a different tribunal.
Procedural Issues and Denied Evidence
The appeal also emphasises procedural issues that may have hurt the defense. One crucial point is that Bankman-Fried was allegedly denied access to important evidence, known as Brady material, which could have supported his situation. The defence believes this evidence could have shown that his actions were not criminal.
The defence also criticises Judge Kaplan for limiting arguments about Bankman-Fried’s investments. They argue that these investments were efforts to stabilise FTX, not fraudulent actions. They believe that the judge’s restrictions on these arguments prevented Bankman-Fried from fully defending himself.
Sullivan & Cromwell’s Role in the Case
Another issue in the dispute concerns Sullivan & Cromwell, the litigation company that worked as FTX’s founding advocate and later became its bankruptcy lawyer. The defence claims the firm wrongfully pressured Bankman-Fried to resign as Chief Executive Officer and then gave information to federal prosecutors. They argue that this relationship made it harder for Bankman-Fried to defend himself properly.
The U.S. attorney’s office, which handled the authorities, has not commented on the demand. Bankman-Fried’s legal team remains hopeful that the alleged judicial bias and procedural issues will result in a new trial. As the release proposal process continues, Bankman remains in detention, awaiting the court’s decision.
disclaimer read moreCrypto News Land, also abbreviated as "CNL", is an independent media entity - we are not affiliated with any company in the blockchain and cryptocurrency industry. We aim to provide fresh and relevant content that will help build up the crypto space since we believe in its potential to impact the world for the better. All of our news sources are credible and accurate as we know it, although we do not make any warranty as to the validity of their statements as well as their motive behind it. While we make sure to double-check the veracity of information from our sources, we do not make any assurances as to the timeliness and completeness of any information in our website as provided by our sources. Moreover, we disclaim any information on our website as investment or financial advice. We encourage all visitors to do your own research and consult with an expert in the relevant subject before making any investment or trading decision.
