Sam Bankman-Fried Backs Off New Trial Request, Keeps Pressure On Judge Removal

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-04-24Última atualização em 2026-04-24

Resumo

Sam Bankman-Fried has withdrawn his request for a new trial, stating he does not expect a fair hearing from Judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversees his criminal case. He withdrew the motion without prejudice, meaning he can refile it after his appeal and a separate request to remove Kaplan from the case are resolved. Bankman-Fried is serving a 25-year sentence for fraud related to the collapse of FTX. The withdrawal followed a court-ordered inquiry into whether he had legal help drafting an earlier filing, which he denied. His efforts to replace the judge and appeal his conviction continue. Outside court, he has sought a pardon, but former President Trump has indicated he will not grant one.

Sam Bankman-Fried has told a federal court he does not expect a fair hearing from the judge overseeing his criminal case — and because of that, he is pulling his request for a new trial.

A Calculated Move In Federal Court

The former FTX chief executive filed a letter Wednesday in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, withdrawing a Rule 33 motion he had been pursuing to overturn his conviction.

The withdrawal, he made clear, is not final. He dropped the motion without prejudice, meaning he can bring it back after his appeal and his separate request to have a different judge assigned to the case are resolved.

Bankman-Fried, 32, is currently held at the Federal Correctional Institution in Lompoc, California, where he is serving a 25-year sentence handed down after his 2023 conviction on fraud and related charges tied to the collapse of FTX.

At its peak, the crypto exchange was one of the largest in the world.

Sam Bankman-Fried's letter to Judge Kaplan released publicly Wednesday. Source: CourtListener.

His decision to pull the motion came after Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered him to explain whether lawyers had helped him draft an earlier filing — a pro se document, meaning one submitted without formal legal representation.

Federal prosecutors had raised doubts about whether Bankman-Fried had written the filing on his own, particularly after his mother, Barbara Fried, sent her own letter to the court. She had no legal standing to do so.

Questions About Who Wrote What

In his Wednesday response, Sam Bankman-Fried said he consulted with his parents while writing the letter but described himself as the “ultimate author of the documents.”

He said the need to respond to the court’s questions had taken time away from preparing a fuller response to prosecutors opposing his new trial request. That, combined with his stated belief that Judge Kaplan would not treat the matter fairly, led him to withdraw the motion.

BTCUSD currently trading at $77,600. Chart: TradingView

His bid to have Kaplan removed from the case predates Wednesday’s filing. Back in February, Bankman-Fried asked a court to assign a different judge to rule on his new trial request, accusing Kaplan of showing “extreme prejudice.”

That request remains active. So does his appeal of both his conviction and his sentence, which is pending before the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Sam Bankman-Fried: Pardon Talk Has Done Little To Help His Cause

Outside the courtroom, Bankman-Fried has made no secret of his interest in a presidential pardon. According to reports, he has posted publicly praising US President Donald Trump’s crypto-related policies and his administration’s military moves in Iran.

But Trump has shown no sign of extending any relief. Based on reports from a January interview with The New York Times, Trump said flatly that he had no plans to pardon the convicted founder of FTX.

Featured image from Getty Images, chart from TradingView

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhy did Sam Bankman-Fried withdraw his request for a new trial?

AHe withdrew the request because he stated he does not expect a fair hearing from Judge Kaplan and the need to respond to the court's questions about who drafted an earlier filing took time away from preparing a fuller response.

QWhat is the status of Sam Bankman-Fried's request to have Judge Kaplan removed from his case?

AHis request to have a different judge assigned to the case remains active and is separate from his withdrawn motion for a new trial.

QWhat specific legal motion did Sam Bankman-Fried file and then withdraw?

AHe withdrew a Rule 33 motion, which is a request for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence.

QWhat was the reason federal prosecutors raised doubts about an earlier court filing from Sam Bankman-Fried?

AProsecutors raised doubts about whether he had written the pro se filing on his own, particularly after his mother, who has no legal standing, sent her own letter to the court.

QHas former President Donald Trump indicated he would pardon Sam Bankman-Fried?

ANo, based on a January interview with The New York Times, Trump said flatly that he had no plans to pardon the convicted founder of FTX.

Leituras Relacionadas

US Senate Makes Important Amendments to "Conflict of Interest" Section of Cryptocurrency Bill

The U.S. Senate has taken a key step regarding the CLARITY Act, which could shape the future of the U.S. crypto market. On July 29, Senators Tom Tillis and Ruben Gallego finalized amendments to the bill's "conflict of interest" rules, one of its most contentious aspects. The bipartisan bill aims to tighten restrictions on high-level federal officials' ties to digital assets. The new text, crafted as an alternative to a White House-endorsed ethics code, is expected to impose stricter rules limiting officials' ability to issue or directly participate in digital asset projects. However, with Congress entering an August recess and the revised text not yet reviewed by much of the Senate, the bill's timeline is uncertain. Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated a procedural vote could occur between July 29 and August 1 but expressed doubt the full bill could pass before the break. The House-approved CLARITY Act, passed in July 2025, has been under Senate negotiation for over a year. Key goals of the CLARITY Act include clarifying jurisdictional boundaries between the SEC and CFTC, setting rules for digital commodity spot markets, and addressing topics like stablecoin yields, DeFi, and illicit financing. The stablecoin yield provisions could significantly impact U.S.-based DeFi protocols, exchanges, and issuers, affecting their global competitiveness. The outcome is being closely watched by both the U.S. and global digital asset markets.

cryptonews.ruHá 44m

US Senate Makes Important Amendments to "Conflict of Interest" Section of Cryptocurrency Bill

cryptonews.ruHá 44m

Pavel Durov Designated as a Terrorist in Russia. What Does This Mean for Telegram Users?

Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram, has been added to Russia's list of terrorists and extremists by Rosfinmonitoring, as published on July 30. The entry includes his name and date of birth. The designation follows an announcement by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) on July 29, which charged Durov with aiding terrorist activity. The FSB alleges that a Telegram dating bot named "DaiVinchik" was used to recruit 46 individuals for attacks on police and arson, orchestrated by Ukrainian special services. The FSB also accuses Telegram's administration of failing to remove channels and bots used by Ukrainian intelligence and extremist groups. Durov is reportedly subject to an international arrest warrant. Inclusion on the Rosfinmonitoring list leads to significant restrictions: the freezing of Durov's bank accounts and assets, severe limitations on financial transactions, and a ban on election participation, media interaction, and event organization. Transfers to his accounts may be considered terrorism financing. For ordinary Russian Telegram users, purchasing Telegram Premium is not classified as financing terrorism, according to an IT expert. General use of the messenger—messaging, managing channels—does not automatically make a user a participant in extremist activity. There has been no official decision to ban Telegram itself. It is noted that French authorities are also investigating Durov over allegations of inadequate measures against criminal activity on the platform and insufficient cooperation with law enforcement. Durov denies all charges.

cryptonews.ruHá 53m

Pavel Durov Designated as a Terrorist in Russia. What Does This Mean for Telegram Users?

cryptonews.ruHá 53m

Trading

Spot
活动图片