U.S. Department of Justice Opposes Jury Questions Proposed by Sam Bankman-Fried
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has argued that key jury questions proposed by Sam Bankman-Fried should be discarded because they are repetitive, prejudicial, and argumentative. Both Bankman-Fried and the defense presented their voir dire questions to the court to assist in selecting an impartial and fair jury.
The prosecution objected to questions in four sections of Bankman-Fried’s proposed questions, claiming that they were unnecessarily intrusive and time-consuming. These included questions about pretrial publicity, the effective altruism movement, political donations and lobbying, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
The prosecution argued that certain questions were unjustifiable because Bankman-Fried himself had actively contributed to press coverage about the case. They also criticized questions related to effective altruism, stating that they were an attempt to advance a defense narrative about the defendant’s intentions.
In-House Coach’s Testimony on ADHD Challenged
The prosecution also expressed dissatisfaction with questions referencing ADHD. They argued that the defense had only provided a letter from a psychiatrist who was previously employed as “FTX’s in-house coach” to support Bankman-Fried’s diagnosis. Given concerns about the coach liberally prescribing medications to FTX employees, including Adderall, the prosecution contended that this evidence alone was insufficient to establish Bankman-Fried’s ADHD.
The overall range of questions varied from general inquiries about jurors’ familiarity with the case to more specific inquiries about their knowledge of individuals with ADHD.
Bankman-Fried’s Trial Approaches
Bankman-Fried’s lawyers have criticized the government’s actions leading up to the upcoming criminal trial scheduled for early October. They accused the government of providing an overwhelming amount of evidence, making it difficult to review prior to the trial.
Additionally, Bankman-Fried’s attorneys argued that the government failed to provide him with sufficient internet connectivity at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Manhattan, where he is currently incarcerated. They claimed that this hindered his ability to review the material related to his case.
Despite Bankman-Fried’s request for temporary release from prison to better prepare for his trial, Judge Kaplan denied the request on September 13. The judge stated that Bankman-Fried was not entitled to see all the evidence against him.
Hot Take: DOJ Opposes Bankman-Fried’s Jury Questions, Citing Repetition and Prejudice
The U.S. Department of Justice has raised objections to the jury questions proposed by Sam Bankman-Fried, claiming they are repetitive, prejudicial, and argumentative. The prosecution argues that these questions are unnecessarily intrusive and time-consuming. They also criticize certain questions related to pretrial publicity, effective altruism, political donations and lobbying, and ADHD.
Furthermore, the prosecution challenges Bankman-Fried’s ADHD diagnosis, stating that the defense’s evidence is insufficient. Bankman-Fried’s lawyers have also criticized the government’s actions leading up to the trial, including providing an overwhelming amount of evidence and failing to provide sufficient internet connectivity for trial preparation. Despite these concerns, Judge Kaplan has denied Bankman-Fried’s request for temporary release from prison. As the trial approaches in October, tensions continue to rise between both sides.
Insa’s extensive background in the financial realm encompasses roles as a writer, trader, and personal finance coach. Her proficiency spans a wide spectrum, ranging from commodities and indices to forex and cryptocurrencies.Insa’s specialization lies in furnishing strategic investment advice tailored to the fintech investment niche.