Within the weeks after Sam Bankman-Fried’s FTX crypto alternate started to crumble final November, he selected to disregard essentially the most primary piece of authorized recommendation: Say nothing, or threat incriminating your self. He took media interviews. He appeared on podcasts. He tweeted incessantly. He started his own Substack. He promised to testify in entrance of Congress, although he was arrested earlier than he acquired the prospect.
Beginning at the moment, Bankman-Fried will stand trial in a New York court docket, accused of seven separate counts of fraud towards prospects, traders, and lenders. FTX collapsed after customers tried to withdraw their cash from the alternate however had been unable to as a result of, the Division of Justice alleges, Bankman-Fried had funneled the cash right into a sibling enterprise, Alameda Analysis, the place it was spent on high-risk crypto trades, debt repayments, private loans, luxurious purchases, and different firm bills.
The trial, whose consequence will imply little for crypto companies or the individuals who misplaced cash in FTX, has already garnered loads of public consideration. The prosecution’s witnesses will embrace victims of the alternate’s collapse and Bankman-Fried’s one-time paramour, former Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison. It could appear intuitive that Bankman-Fried, the protagonist, ought to have a talking position. However his attorneys may effectively advise him to plead the Fifth Modification and decline to testify.
In his public appearances earlier than his arrest, Bankman-Fried characterised the scenario as one large mistake. There was negligence, he admits, however no prison intent to defraud. However his makes an attempt to elucidate away the allegations might create complications for his authorized crew in court docket. Because the protection, the target is to “create an immaculate narrative,” says Jason Allegrante, chief authorized officer at crypto custody agency Fireblocks, to “current the very best narrative the information will help.” However when Bankman-Fried started “defending himself within the media and court docket of public opinion,” he risked “introducing into the general public document a variety of info and materials that can be utilized towards him.”
Because the trial progresses, Bankman-Fried’s protection crew might want to take those self same dangers into consideration in deciding who to position on the stand.
Bankman-Fried’s trial will final 4 to 6 weeks. First, the prosecution will lay out its case, calling all its witnesses—from FTX prospects to traders to alleged “coconspirators.” Then the protection will select how you can reply. Beneath the US justice system, the prosecution should reveal guilt past an affordable doubt. Due to this fact, a viable protection technique, says Jordan Estes, associate at legislation agency Kramer Levin, is to “simply poke holes within the authorities’s case” and decline to supply up any further witnesses.
Whether or not Bankman-Fried takes the stand or not will solely be determined, says Estes, as soon as the energy of the prosecution’s case turns into clear. He’s under no circumstances required to testify. “It’s his resolution. We’ll simply have to attend and see,” she says. “If the federal government’s case isn’t going effectively—in the event that they name witnesses that don’t seem very credible or the cross-examination goes terribly—there’s a risk the protection will really feel it doesn’t have to do something.”
In any prison case, the choice to place the defendant on the stand is a “high-stakes second,” says Allegrante. Doing so exposes them to questioning by the prosecution that they might in any other case keep away from, but in addition to the way in which particular jurors may interpret their testimony. It introduces further variables to an setting the protection hopes to rigorously management.
