US DOJ Opposes Cross-Examination of Witnesses
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutors have opposed Sam Bankman-Fried’s (SBF) attorneys from cross-examining witnesses in the ongoing case. The prosecutors argue that the defense’s motion is without merit and a waste of judicial resources.
Prosecutors Reject Arguments on Wire Fraud Theories
The DOJ prosecutors believe that the defendant’s arguments regarding theories of wire fraud are incorrect. They also state that seeking investor testimony regarding their understanding of the defendant’s representations is appropriate. However, the prosecutors have no objection to cross-examination by SBF’s defense team on certain topics such as FTX’s terms of service.
Judge Denied Cross-Examination Request for Former FTX CTO
Judge Kaplan previously denied the defense’s request to cross-examine former FTX CTO Gary Wang, and now SBF’s lawyers are seeking to cross-examine former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison on similar arguments. Prosecutors argue that this motion should also be denied.
Defense Requests Clarification and Reconsideration
The defense team has requested clarification and reconsideration on certain portions of the court’s rulings. However, the prosecutors consider these requests irrelevant. The judge has already precluded the defense from mentioning Anthropic, cross-examining Wang and Ellison, and discussing FTX’s regulation in the US.
Hot Take: Prosecutors Oppose Cross-Examination in SBF Case
The US DOJ prosecutors have opposed Sam Bankman-Fried’s defense team from cross-examining witnesses in his ongoing case. The prosecutors argue that the defense’s motion is without merit and a waste of judicial resources. They also reject the defendant’s arguments on wire fraud theories and believe that seeking investor testimony is appropriate. However, they have no objection to cross-examination on certain topics. The defense’s request to cross-examine former FTX CTO Gary Wang was previously denied, and now they seek to cross-examine former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison. The prosecutors argue that this motion should also be denied, and they consider the defense’s requests for clarification and reconsideration irrelevant.
Gapster Innes emerges as a visionary adeptly blending the roles of crypto analyst, dedicated researcher, and editorial maestro into an intricate tapestry of insight. Amidst the dynamic world of digital currencies, Gapster’s insights resonate like finely tuned harmonies, captivating curious minds from various corners. His talent for unraveling intricate threads of crypto intricacies melds seamlessly with his editorial finesse, transforming complexity into an eloquent symphony of comprehension.