A British Barrister and Other Witnesses Barred from Testifying in Sam Bankman-Fried’s Trial
A district judge has ordered that a British barrister, a professor at the University of Michigan, and others will not be testifying at the upcoming trial of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried. The judge’s order provides insight into the topics that may or may not be discussed during the trial, set to begin on October 3rd.
The British barrister, Lawrence Akka, had planned to testify about the meaning of FTX’s terms of services and obligations. However, the judge deemed this testimony inadmissible, stating that an English barrister’s opinion on contractual language is not a proper subject for the jury’s consideration.
In late August, prosecutors requested that seven witnesses be barred from testifying, citing their failure to meet the criteria for expert testimony. This list included Thomas Bishop, Brian Kim, Joseph Pimbley, Bradley Smith, Peter Vinella, and Andrew Di Wu. The judge’s order excludes all of these witnesses from testifying, although there is a possibility for them to testify if certain conditions are met.
Government expert Peter Easton will be allowed to testify and discuss customer fiat deposits, despite objections from Bankman-Fried’s lawyer.
Irrelevant Issues
Professor Smith’s planned testimony was deemed inadmissible by Judge Kaplan due to its lack of clarity and relevance to the trial’s issues. Kaplan stated that most of Smith’s proposed testimony would not be relevant or would risk confusing or misleading the jury.
Pimbley’s planned testimony was also excluded; however, he may be called to respond to a government witness if necessary.
Vinella’s testimony focused on FTX combining aspects of traditional and decentralized finance, but the judge ruled that the innovation of FTX is not a relevant factor in this case.
Hot Take: Sam Bankman-Fried’s Trial Witnesses Barred
A British barrister and several other witnesses have been barred from testifying in the upcoming trial of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried. The judge ruled that the barrister’s testimony on the meaning of FTX’s terms of services and obligations was inadmissible. Additionally, other witnesses were excluded due to their failure to meet the criteria for expert testimony. While government expert Peter Easton will be allowed to testify about customer fiat deposits, several witnesses’ planned testimonies were deemed irrelevant or confusing by Judge Kaplan. This development highlights the limitations on the scope of discussion during the trial and raises questions about its potential outcome.
By
By
By
By