FTX Founder Sam Bankman‑Fried Pushes For New Trial In New York

bitcoinistОпубліковано о 2026-02-10Востаннє оновлено о 2026-02-10

Анотація

Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, has filed a pro se motion in a New York federal court requesting a new trial. He argues that new witness testimony could undermine the prosecution's case and challenge key aspects of the narrative that led to his conviction. Bankman-Fried, who is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence for fraud and other charges, continues to dispute the legitimacy of FTX's bankruptcy. He claims the company was not insolvent and alleges that lawyers initiated bankruptcy proceedings for their own financial benefit without his authorization. This motion is a separate attempt to reopen the case alongside his ongoing appeal.

Sam Bankman‐Fried, the co-founder and former chief executive of collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, has filed a request for a new trial in New York on Tuesday, arguing that fresh witness testimony could undermine the government’s case against him.

Bid To Revive FTX Trial

As reported by Bloomberg, the motion, dated February 5 and entered into the docket on Tuesday in Manhattan federal court, was submitted pro se, meaning Bankman‐Fried is acting on his own behalf rather than through legal counsel.

In the filing, Bankman‐Fried contends that testimony from new witnesses could challenge key aspects of the prosecution’s narrative and potentially cast doubt on the verdict. He argues that this evidence was not previously presented and could materially affect the outcome of the case.

The motion does not replace his ongoing appeal but represents an additional attempt to reopen the proceedings. The request follows comments Bankman‐Fried made earlier on Tuesday on social media in which he again disputed the legitimacy of FTX’s bankruptcy.

Bankman‐Fried Denies Insolvency Issues

From prison, he has increasingly advanced the argument that the company’s collapse was driven by legal and financial maneuvering rather than criminal wrongdoing.

He claimed that FTX was not insolvent and said he never authorized a bankruptcy filing, alleging instead that lawyers assumed control of the company and quickly initiated bankruptcy proceedings for their own financial benefit.

Bankman‐Fried was convicted on all seven counts he faced, including fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering, in the case United States v. Bankman‐Fried.

On March 28, 2024, the court sentenced him to 25 years in federal prison and ordered him to forfeit approximately $11 billion, reflecting the scale of losses tied to the collapse of FTX.

The 1-D chart shows the exchange’s native token, FTT, trending upwards on Tuesday. Source: FTTUSDT on TradingView.com

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is Sam Bankman-Fried requesting in the New York court, and on what grounds?

ASam Bankman-Fried is requesting a new trial, arguing that fresh witness testimony could undermine the government's case against him and challenge key aspects of the prosecution's narrative.

QHow was the motion for a new trial filed, and what does this indicate about Bankman-Fried's legal representation?

AThe motion was filed pro se, meaning Bankman-Fried submitted it on his own behalf without the use of his legal counsel.

QWhat argument has Bankman-Fried been making from prison regarding the collapse of FTX?

AHe has argued that FTX's collapse was driven by legal and financial maneuvering rather than criminal wrongdoing, claiming the company was not insolvent and that lawyers initiated bankruptcy for their own financial benefit.

QWhat was the final outcome of the United States v. Bankman-Fried case?

AHe was convicted on all seven counts, including fraud and money laundering, and was sentenced to 25 years in federal prison and ordered to forfeit approximately $11 billion.

QWhat does the article mention about the FTX token (FT) on the day the motion was filed?

AThe article includes a chart showing the FTX token, FTT, trending upwards on that Tuesday.

Пов'язані матеріали

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手4 год тому

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手4 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit6 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit6 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手8 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手8 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit9 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit9 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片