Home>Business>Prosecution makes closing argument in opposition to SBF

Prosecution makes closing argument in opposition to SBF

The federal government introduced its rebuttal in opposition to Sam Bankman-Fried on Nov. 2 in response to statements made by his protection through the closing arguments a day earlier.

A jury of 12 will obtain closing directions within the Southern District Court docket of Manhattan on Nov. 2, with a verdict anticipated by 8:00 pm native time. The jury will obtain pizza and transportation if their verdict comes after courtroom hours, in keeping with District Court docket Lewis Kaplan.

Talking on the courtroom, ​​U.S. Assistant Lawyer Danielle Sassoon claimed prosecutors “met the burden” of proving that Bankman-Fried is responsible of seven counts of fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud.

In line with Sassoon, the previous FTX CEO gave prospects, traders and the media the misunderstanding that belongings held at FTX have been secure and that Alameda Analysis had no involvement with the funds.

Sassoon pointed to Bankman-Fried’s tweets and public statements made within the months and weeks earlier than FTX’s collapse, together with claims that prospects’ funds have been held in segregated accounts when, in actuality, they have been being utilized by Alameda Analysis.

Sassoon additionally refuted the protection’s argument that Bankman-Fried made public appearances within the media after FTX’s collapse, claiming his interviews and tweets used to make him look dependable at a time his trade wasn’t in a position to pay again its prospects.

“He didn’t need to be a felony on the run,” she famous, including that Bankman-Fried had the ambition to be president of the USA. “He lied to get prospects’ belief.”

The prosecution went over spreadsheets to refute claims that Bankman-Fried did not learn about Alameda’s multi-billion-dollar line of credit score and reimbursement of lenders with buyer funds, including that Bankman-Fried thought buyer funds have been his “piggy financial institution.”

In line with Sassoon, the protection’s assertion that the federal government painted Bankman-Fried as a monster throughout closing arguments the day earlier than was “determined.”

“They have been appearing on the defendant’s route,” Sassoon mentioned about Caroline Ellison, Gary Wang and Nishad Singh.

Bankman-Fried’s former internal circle cooperated with the federal government and testified in the case. Throughout closing arguments, protection attorneys tried to disqualify their testimony, claiming it was made below a strict cooperation settlement with federal prosecutors.

The protection, in keeping with Sassoon, wished the jurors to consider that Bankman-Fried was clueless about what was occurring with Alameda and FTX. “It is absurd,” mentioned the U.S. lawyer, claiming the protection’s claims contradicted the proof.

Associated: Sam Bankman-Fried ‘doubled down’ by buying Binance’s stake in FTX — US prosecutors

The FTX technique, Sassoon mentioned, was to not rent a danger officer to make sure no one came upon about deleted messages and embezzlement.

“He knew what he was doing was unsuitable; that’s why he by no means employed a danger officer,” she instructed the jury.