Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried Claims Lawyers Approved Policies in Fraud Trial
Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) testified in his criminal fraud trial, asserting that he acted in good faith based on the legal approval of his decisions at FTX. He claimed that lawyers sanctioned policies around document retention, auto-deletion of messages, and FTX’s banking arrangement with Alameda Research.
However, SBF faced difficulties during cross-examination by prosecutors. He frequently struggled to recall specifics or conversations with lawyers, prompting the judge to urge him to directly answer questions.
An FBI agent revealed that SBF participated in over 300 Signal groups, many with auto-delete enabled. This suggests extensive digital communications that may lack retention.
Prosecutors aggressively questioned SBF about the alleged misuse of customer funds and pushed him to identify legal agreements allowing such actions. SBF was unable to clearly point to provisions permitting this.
SBF placed responsibility on lawyers like Dan Friedberg for policies such as auto-deletion on Signal and the FTX/Alameda payment agent agreement, claiming they approved these policies.
The jury was not present during SBF’s testimony. The judge will review his statements before deciding what can be presented to the jury.
While SBF tried to deflect responsibility onto lawyers who allegedly approved his decisions, prosecution questioning exposed uncertainties and lack of recall on his part.
The trial is nearing its end, with closing arguments and jury deliberations expected soon. The outcome remains uncertain.
Hot Take: Former FTX CEO Struggles in Fraud Trial
In the ongoing criminal fraud trial of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, his testimony has raised questions about his credibility. While he claimed that lawyers approved the policies that led to FTX’s collapse, he struggled to recall specific details during cross-examination by prosecutors. The prosecution aggressively challenged his assertions and pushed for clarity on the alleged misuse of customer funds. SBF’s attempt to shift blame onto lawyers may not hold up under scrutiny. As the trial nears its end, the outcome remains uncertain, but the verdict could have significant implications for SBF and his reputation in the crypto world.
By
By
By
By