- Sam Bankman-Fried appealed the fraud conviction and requested for a brand new trial.
- SBF claims Decide Lewis Kaplan's ruling in opposition to him was unfair and biased.
- Attorneys say the decide steadily criticized and ridiculed SBF through the trial.
FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, who was jailed on fraud and conspiracy fees, has appealed his fraud conviction and requested for a brand new trial. The billionaire wrote in a 102-page report filed Friday that U.S. District Decide Lewis Kaplan's ruling on FTX's collapse was unfair and biased.
FTX Fall and SBF's Fraud
Following the FTX debacle that led to an prolonged crypto winter, Bankman-Fried was convicted of a number of fraud and conspiracy fees, with some calling it one of many largest monetary frauds in American historical past. Whereas the seven fees totaled as much as 115 years in jail, SBF's household and acquaintances requested the decide for leniency, citing his psychiatric circumstances.
In accordance with his mom Barbara Fried's letter to the decide, SBF suffered from autism spectrum dysfunction (ASD). She mentioned jail may make his situation worse. George Lerner, a Bankman-Fried psychiatrist, corroborated her phrases, including that SBF's actions weren’t motivated by greed, however by his psychiatric circumstances. Nonetheless, Decide Kaplan sentenced him to 25 years in jail.
Attorneys problem the decide's biased resolution
SBF legal professional Alexandra Shapiro argued in a current report that the decide restricted Bankman-Fried from presenting sure protection arguments. He added that the decide made important remarks, questioned the credibility of the protection and questioned the defendant's testimony in entrance of the jury. The lawyer went on to imagine that the federal government offered a “false narrative” about FTX’s downfall, citing: “The decide who presided over his trial discovered him (SBF) responsible.
SBF's authorized workforce argued that the decide's angle in the direction of Bankman Fried through the trial was biased. They argued that the decide typically criticized and ridiculed him, questioned his credibility and expressed skepticism about his testimony.
Disclaimer: The knowledge supplied on this article is for informational and academic functions solely. This text doesn’t represent monetary recommendation or recommendation of any sort. Coin Version shall not be answerable for any losses incurred because of the usage of mentioned content material, services or products. Readers are suggested to train warning earlier than taking any motion associated to the Firm.
