The Fate of Sam Bankman-Fried Now Rests with a Jury of Twelve
Sam Bankman-Fried's future hangs in the balance as a jury of his peers holds the power to determine his fate The verdict now rests in the hands of twelve individuals, marking a pivotal moment in his life
The fate of Sam Bankman-Fried now rests with a jury comprised of his peers.
In a Manhattan federal court, over the course of four weeks, the 12 jurors and five alternates have attentively listened to over 60 hours of testimonies regarding the ascent and decline of a multibillion-dollar cryptocurrency business empire, with Bankman-Fried being the central figure.
Judge Lewis Kaplan dismissed the alternate jurors on Thursday after providing them with extensive oral instructions for about three hours. He then proceeded to send the 12 jurors for deliberations. While stating that the jurors can deliberate until 8 pm ET on Thursday, Judge Kaplan made it clear that they are not obligated to do so.
Prosecutors have informed the jury that Bankman-Fried, aged 31, masterminded an extensive fraudulent scheme, constructing a "pyramid of deceit." This elaborate scheme unraveled when the market downturned and his fortune waned. Witnesses, who were both longtime friends and business associates, were summoned, and as per their plea bargains, directly implicated Bankman-Fried as the individual in control of his cryptocurrency companies, FTX and Alameda Research.
They claimed that Bankman-Fried directed them to commit the alleged crimes of stealing money from customer accounts and lying about it.
Bankman-Fried is facing seven federal counts of fraud and conspiracy, but he has pleaded not guilty. He has been vocal about his side of the story that led to the bankruptcy of both FTX and Alameda. According to him, the mistakes that caused the downfall of the companies were problematic, but not illegal. They were the kind of careless errors that startups often make.
Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of FTX, is shown testifying in this court sketch. The trial is being presided over by Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan federal court on Tuesday, October 31, 2023, in New York.
Elizabeth Williams/AP
In closing arguments, lawyers spin a tale of two very different Sam Bankman-Frieds
Bankman-Fried admitted that the lack of a dedicated risk management team and a chief risk officer was the most significant error among several others he mentioned during his testimony. He stated, "I made both minor and major mistakes, but the most crucial one was the absence of a dedicated risk management team and chief risk officer."
However, on Thursday, US Assistant Attorney Danielle Sassoon referred to this as a deliberate strategy rather than a mere error. "When one is involved in embezzling customer funds, it is only natural not to employ a risk officer," she explained. "Just like you cannot walk into a jewelry store, steal a diamond necklace, and then claim there was no security guard."
Lead defense attorney Mark Cohen argued that the government's portrayal of his client as a "movie villain" is inaccurate. Cohen informed the jury that while Bankman-Fried may have made errors, he never intentionally deceived anyone. He emphasized that in the real world, unlike the fictional world depicted in movies, situations can often become complicated. Cohen further asserted that poor risk management should not be treated as a criminal offense.
