Sam Bankman-Fried’s Defense Requests Specific Jury Instructions
The defense team for former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried has submitted proposed jury instructions to the court prior to jury deliberations and the verdict. These instructions aim to clarify the defense’s legal positions and emphasize Bankman-Fried’s right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
In their court submission, Bankman-Fried’s attorneys request that jurors base their convictions only on defined statutory crimes, rather than general immorality. The instructions also provide a detailed explanation of fraud and outline FTX’s terms of service.
The defense highlights that the terms of service form a contract between FTX and its customers, and urges jurors to consider the legal relationship outlined in that contract.
Bankman-Fried’s defense team includes Mark Cohen, Christian Everdell, David Lisner, and Sri Kuehnlenz. Cohen is a well-known lawyer who previously defended Ghislaine Maxwell in her sex trafficking trial.
The defense underscores the principle of “good faith” as a complete defense, even if mistakes were made resulting in harm to others. They also argue that seeking legal advice demonstrates good faith.
Prosecutors Reject Bankman-Fried’s Defense Strategy
On the same day, the prosecution submitted their counter-proposals. They argue that Bankman-Fried’s intention to reimburse clients for any misused funds does not hold legal weight. The government seeks an instruction stating that a belief in repayment does not equate to good faith.
The prosecution also aims to dismiss arguments suggesting that Bankman-Fried’s personal beliefs or intentions to “do good” can justify illegal actions. They assert that ethical or political reasons cannot serve as a defense against criminal charges.
“Any argument that the defendant lacked wrongful intent because he subscribed to an idiosyncratic philosophy about the morality of lying and stealing, and placed a greater premium on his subjective conception of the long-term good, would be irrelevant.”
The government also rejects the defense’s focus on the terms of service, stating that it does not authorize the defendant’s actions. The jury will not be responsible for assessing a breach of the terms of service.
Both parties have presented extensive and opposing submissions ahead of the November trial, where Bankman-Fried faces charges including wire fraud and money laundering. These submissions reveal significant disagreements on key legal matters central to the fraud case against the FTX founder.
Hot Take: Defense and Prosecution Clash Over Key Legal Points in Bankman-Fried Trial
The trial of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried has reached a crucial stage as both the defense and prosecution present their proposed jury instructions. The defense emphasizes “good faith” as a complete defense, while the prosecution argues against Bankman-Fried’s beliefs justifying illegal actions. Additionally, there is disagreement over whether FTX’s terms of service can authorize his actions.
This clash highlights the complexity of the case and the differing interpretations of legal principles. Ultimately, it will be up to the jury to carefully consider these instructions and reach a verdict based on defined statutory crimes rather than general immorality or personal beliefs.
By
By
By
By
By
By