Prosecutors File Affirmation of Bail Denial
The United States Attorney's Office has filed an affirmation of the denial of bail to former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, claiming that he could attempt witness tampering, and stating that no release conditions would assure the safety of the witnesses. Prosecutors responded to several claims made in his appeal against the bail revocation, calling it "meritless."
Continued Evasions of Pre-Trial Release Conditions
The prosecutors in their response argued that Bankman-Fried was found to have twice committed/attempted witness tampering in violation of the court orders. Thus, in light of the continued evasions of his pre-trial release conditions, Bankman-Fried was unlikely to abide by the conditions of release.
Instances of Contacting Witnesses
The first time Bankman-Fried attempted to contact witnesses came to light in January of this year when he initiated contact with the then-General Counsel of FTX US, who is also a potential trial witness represented by counsel.
The second such instance came in July 2023, when private journal messages of Caroline Ellison, the former CEO of Alameda and Bankman-Fried's associate, were published by a New York Times report. Bankman-Fried's counsel confirmed that the journal was leaked by Bankman-Fried himself. Prosecutors highlighted how he had covertly provided private writings of Ellison to discredit her and potentially influence the perception of the jury in the case when it goes to trial.
Revocation of Bail Plea
On July 26, prosecutors appealed to revoke Bankman-Fried's bail plea based on his violations of the bail conditions and attempts to influence witnesses. Federal judge Lewis Kaplan from the District Court for the Southern District of New York then revoked Bankman-Fried's bail on Aug. 11 after he was found to have contacted witnesses in an attempt to influence or intimidate them. Bankman-Fried had been out on bail on a $250 million bond since December 2022.
Appeal Against Bail Revocation
On Aug. 28, Bankman-Fried's lawyers appealed against the revocation of the bail ruling and claimed that he was well within his right to talk to the press about Caroline Ellison as it was protected under the First Amendment. However, prosecutors argued that Judge Kaplan took Bankman-Fried's First Amendment rights into consideration in the ruling. The judge noted that "the law is that once communication is undertaken as part of or with the intent to intimidate or influence a witness, it’s a crime, and the First Amendment has nothing to do with it."
Prosecutors' Arguments Against the Appeal
The prosecutors made two key arguments against Bankman-Fried's appeal:
- The District Court did not clearly err in finding probable cause to believe Bankman-Fried twice committed attempted witness tampering while on pretrial release.
- Judge Kaplan did not clearly err in finding probable cause that Bankman-Fried attempted to tamper with Witness 1.
The prosecutors also argued that the defendants didn't dispute the ruling in Bankman-Fried's attempt to witness the former FTX US counsel, which the judge found to be a clear attempt of witness tampering.
Did you miss our previous article...
https://trendinginthenews.com/crypto-currency/marathons-bitcoin-production-drops-9-in-august
