Defense Claims Judicial Partiality, Argues Solvency Proof Was Omitted in SBF Appeal

Sam Bankman-Fried, who previously led the cryptocurrency platform FTX, has challenged his 25-year prison term, asserting that he was treated as guilty from the outset and that his trial was marred by judicial prejudice and procedural mistakes. His appeal, managed by appellate attorney Alexandra Shapiro, argues that the proceedings were tainted by "premature conclusions" from the press, prosecutors, and U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who presided over the case. The scheduled hearing on November 4 will decide if the case should be retried before a different judge and jury, as noted in a

The main point raised by the defense is that Bankman-Fried was denied a fair opportunity to defend himself. Prosecutors accused him of orchestrating an $11 billion fraud by mixing customer assets with those of Alameda Research, his hedge fund, and deceiving investors and creditors. The defense, however, maintains that Bankman-Fried believed FTX remained solvent and that all users would ultimately be reimbursed. A significant dispute is that Judge Kaplan prevented the jury from considering evidence that FTX held enough assets to cover user losses—a detail the defense claims was vital to refuting the fraud allegations, according to

The appeal further points to irregularities in the trial process. Bankman-Fried's attorneys argue that he was compelled to preview his testimony in a private session with the judge and prosecutors before addressing the jury. They claim this allowed prosecutors to better anticipate his statements and tailor their cross-examination. "The government received an advance look at Bankman-Fried's testimony, as well as a rehearsal to sharpen their cross-examination before the jury," Shapiro stated in a court document, as referenced in

The hearing on November 4 will not reconsider the underlying charges but will instead focus on whether the trial was conducted fairly. Both the prosecution, led by former SEC Chairman Jay Clayton, and the defense will have 10 minutes each to present their arguments, with the judge able to interject with questions. The defense has also petitioned for a different judge in the event of a retrial, alleging that Kaplan showed bias during the original proceedings, including making "prejudicial comments" that weakened their case, according to

Beyond the appeal, reports suggest that Bankman-Fried's parents have approached Donald Trump for a presidential pardon, as mentioned in

The result of this appeal could have significant consequences for the cryptocurrency industry, which continues to face regulatory challenges and reputational issues after FTX's downfall. The defense's focus on the absence of fraudulent intent and FTX's financial stability stands in stark contrast to the prosecution's assertion that Bankman-Fried's conduct led to massive losses and the platform's bankruptcy.

As the appeals court considers the defense's arguments, the case highlights the critical importance of due process and impartiality in high-profile corporate fraud trials, especially under the glare of public and media attention.