Connect with us


Prosecution Requests Court to Deny FTX Founder’s Appeal for Temporary Discharge

The letter argues against the motion that Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) filed for his temporary discharge from the jail ahead of the trial.

ShahZaib Ahmed



ftx ceo got convicted

The US government released a letter for Judge Lewis Kaplan on 27 September. The letter argues against the motion that Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) filed for his temporary discharge from the jail ahead of the trial. As per the schedule, the court will hear the arguments from the defendant’s side as well as the prosecutors later today.

Prosecution Appeals Court to Discharge Bankman-Fried’s Motion for Provisional Release

In the filing, the authorities requested the judge to repudiate the request that SBF made. The government filed the respective request on 25 September. According to the authorities, Bankman-Fried’s assertions are not capable of meaningfully taking part in his defence. While adding to this, the government noted that his reasons do not outweigh the hazard posed by his release in line with the former conduct of SBF.

Also Read: Coinbase Intends To Buy FTX Europe

The government moved on to disclose that a significant danger related to his release deals with a risk posed to the community. Another such hazard concerns his potential flight. In addition to this, it brought to the front that the modified motion reutilizes generalized assertions. While supporting its argument, the government provided references.

The Government Discloses Former Instances to Fortify Its Argument

It referred to a couple of former instances when the court raised objections against analogous requests. The initial took place on 12 September when the court denied the FTX founder’s request regarding an immediate release. In that request, Bankman-Fried discussed many factors. The 2nd instance took place on 21 September when a 3-judge panel rejected his request for discharge from the jail.

Also Read: Bankman-Fried’s Parents Accused of Swindling Millions from FTX

The judges asserted that the arguments were unpersuasive. The prosecution additionally indicated that the court agreed that there existed probable cause to rely on the assumption that Bankman-Fried tried to tamper with a couple of witnesses.  This allegedly infringed the laws. In line with the respective setting, the government is convinced that the latest motion possesses the same flaws.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *