<\/p>\n
U.S. government prosecutors have moved to admit and exclude specific evidence in the case of former FTX<\/a> CEO Sam-Bankman Fried in an Aug. 14<\/a> filing.<\/p>\n In the relevant filing, prosecutors asserted that communications from Bankman-Fried\u2019s associates should not be excluded as hearsay. Notably, prosecutors plan to include a note from former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison<\/a> that is colorfully titled \u201cThings Sam is Freaking Out About\u201d as one piece of evidence of supposed wrongdoing.<\/p>\n According to the filing, this document:<\/p>\n \u2026delineates Ellison\u2019s understanding, from conversations with the defendant, of what remained the defendant\u2019s top business concerns, such as Alameda\u2019s trading hedges, bad press about the relationship between Alameda and FTX, and fundraising.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The list of evidence also includes a recording of Ellison that originated in November 2022, around the time of FTX\u2019s insolvency, that could also be used as evidence against Bankman-Fried. Prosecutors said:<\/p>\n [During a] meeting, an employee asked Ellison who else had been aware of the shortfall in FTX user funds. Ellison answered: \u201cYeah, I mean, I guess I talked about it with, like, Sam [Bankman-Fried], Nishad [Singh], and Gary [Wang].\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The conversation continued:<\/p>\n An employee pressed Ellison: \u201cWho made the decision on using user deposits?\u201d Ellison answered: \u201cUm . . . Sam, I guess.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Prosecutors argued that the above statements are not hearsay due to Ellison\u2019s role as a co-conspirator in Bankman-Fried\u2019s supposed wrongdoing and because she acted as an agent for Bankman-Fried during her employment.<\/p>\n Prosecutors also said that former FTX DM co-CEO Ryan Salame<\/a> conspired in Bankman-Fried\u2019s alleged campaign financing scheme. They recognized that Salame would not act as a witness as he plans to invoke his right against self-incrimination, but suggested that Salame\u2019s past statements about his role as a \u201cstraw donor\u201d who made donations on behalf of Bankman-Fried are admissible as evidence and are not hearsay.<\/p>\n Prosecutors also asserted that certain evidence is admissible if it provides direct evidence of the crimes Bankman-Fried is accused of. Notably, prosecutors said that evidence of Bankman-Fried\u2019s campaign financing violations<\/a> should be included as evidence even though they cannot currently seek a conviction on that matter.<\/p>\n Prosecutors added that evidence concerning Bankman-Fried\u2019s other alleged activities should also be admitted, such as false statements to an unnamed bank, bribery of a Chinese official concerning frozen accounts, creation and manipulation of the FTT token, improper prioritization of payments to creditors, and message autodeletion policies.<\/p>\n Government prosecutors said that Bankman-Fried should also be prevented from introducing specific evidence. Among other things, they said he should not introduce evidence that attempts to lay blame on the public or regulators, suggests that he intended to repay victims, or argues that any of FTX\u2019s disclaimers users make the charges irrelevant.<\/p>\n Bankman-Fried\u2019s own lawyers responded to the government\u2019s motion by expressing their own intent<\/a> to exclude certain evidence.<\/p>\n The accused\u2019s lawyers argued that prosecutors should not introduce evidence produced to the defense after July 1. They noted that the government had missed discovery deadlines and has still failed to produce certain information, including the contents of Gary Wang\u2019s laptop and Caroline Ellison\u2019s encrypted Telegram chats. The defense argues that those delays have prevented them from fully preparing for trial.<\/p>\n Bankman-Fried\u2019s lawyers added that metadata should be excluded as evidence as it can be altered. They noted that some metadata is already incomplete or unreliable.<\/p>\n The defense lawyers further said that Bankman-Fried\u2019s resignation from FTX should not be admitted as evidence. They said that senior leadership and outside counsel \u201cstrongarmed\u201d the former CEO into leaving the company and said that those events do not serve as evidence of any actions he committed previously.<\/p>\n Lawyers also argued that prosecutors should not use FTX\u2019s bankruptcy and lack of solvency as evidence, nor should they use public statements concerning FTX.US, which operated separately from FTX\u2019s Bahamas-based platform, as evidence.<\/p>\n The above filings are the latest steps toward Bankman-Fried\u2019s October trial, where he will face numerous criminal charges outlined in previous indictments<\/a>. Bankman-Fried is currently being held<\/a> at Metropolitan Detention Center, Brooklyn.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" U.S. government prosecutors have moved to admit and exclude specific evidence in the case of former FTX CEO Sam-Bankman Fried in an Aug. 14 filing. Caroline Ellison\u2019s statements could become evidence In the relevant filing, prosecutors asserted that communications from Bankman-Fried\u2019s associates should not be excluded as hearsay. Notably, prosecutors plan to include a note […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":128041,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[230,225,221,227,226,228,229,60,223,224,222],"class_list":["post-137540","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cryptocurrency","tag-brave","tag-coinbase","tag-crypto","tag-decentralised","tag-decentralized","tag-decentralized-exchange","tag-erc-20","tag-featured","tag-meme-coin","tag-robinhood","tag-solana"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/137540","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=137540"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/137540\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":137541,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/137540\/revisions\/137541"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/128041"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=137540"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=137540"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=137540"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Caroline Ellison\u2019s statements could become evidence<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
Direct evidence will likely be admitted<\/h2>\n
SBF lawyers move to exclude late evidence<\/h2>\n