Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother
-
Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother
@molly0xfff Reading the Chapsky declaration, what is the '"special features" that were added to the Alameda "info@" account on FTX'? Google is being useless and I'm imagining some sort of backchannel email-based bot.
-
Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother
@molly0xfff
his mother is a law professor at Stanfordhis mother
is a law professor
at... god why is this timeline so fucking ridiculous
-
Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother
His motion mainly argues that two former FTX employees who didn't testify (Daniel Chapsky and Ryan Salame) would have undercut prosecutors' narrative, but were threatened out of testifying. He also claims Nishad Singh was coerced by prosecutors into changing his testimony.
It also repeats his longstanding argument that the funds were never missing and that FTX was never insolvent. (Judge Kaplan got a bit sick of this argument during trial, pointing out that repayment doesn't negate fraud).
-
His motion mainly argues that two former FTX employees who didn't testify (Daniel Chapsky and Ryan Salame) would have undercut prosecutors' narrative, but were threatened out of testifying. He also claims Nishad Singh was coerced by prosecutors into changing his testimony.
It also repeats his longstanding argument that the funds were never missing and that FTX was never insolvent. (Judge Kaplan got a bit sick of this argument during trial, pointing out that repayment doesn't negate fraud).
And finally he demands Judge Kaplan recuse himself, arguing he showed "extreme prejudice". Both that argument and his "no actual loss" theory are already being litigated in his pending appeal before the Second Circuit, which I wrote about here: https://www.citationneeded.news/issue-96/#sbf
-
@molly0xfff Reading the Chapsky declaration, what is the '"special features" that were added to the Alameda "info@" account on FTX'? Google is being useless and I'm imagining some sort of backchannel email-based bot.
@ryan he's referring to the `allow_negative` flag: https://www.citationneeded.news/the-fraud-was-in-the-code/
-
@molly0xfff
his mother is a law professor at Stanfordhis mother
is a law professor
at... god why is this timeline so fucking ridiculous
@joshg was*
-
R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topicR relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
-
I incentive moved this topic from Uncategorized
-
@molly0xfff That's a good sign. Means that he can't afford to buy a pardon.
@molly0xfff @riley
Maybe he just tries to lower the price -
And finally he demands Judge Kaplan recuse himself, arguing he showed "extreme prejudice". Both that argument and his "no actual loss" theory are already being litigated in his pending appeal before the Second Circuit, which I wrote about here: https://www.citationneeded.news/issue-96/#sbf
Pardon seeking. Sigh.
-
Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother
@molly0xfff is it normal not to redact her email address and phone number? at least the email address looks private.
-
His motion mainly argues that two former FTX employees who didn't testify (Daniel Chapsky and Ryan Salame) would have undercut prosecutors' narrative, but were threatened out of testifying. He also claims Nishad Singh was coerced by prosecutors into changing his testimony.
It also repeats his longstanding argument that the funds were never missing and that FTX was never insolvent. (Judge Kaplan got a bit sick of this argument during trial, pointing out that repayment doesn't negate fraud).
@molly0xfff
I'm not a great bookkeeper but these people just continue to make me itch. -
Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother
@molly0xfff Is
"please receive this humble pro se filing
-sincerely, high-powered lawyer" as incongruous as it looks?
-
@molly0xfff Is
"please receive this humble pro se filing
-sincerely, high-powered lawyer" as incongruous as it looks?
@molly0xfff @fuzzyfuzzyfungus
"Emeritus/Emerita is an adjective that means no longer having a position, especially in a college or university, but keeping the title."
emeritus
EMERITUS definition: 1. no longer having a position, especially in a college or university, but keeping the title of the…. Learn more.
(dictionary.cambridge.org)
-
And finally he demands Judge Kaplan recuse himself, arguing he showed "extreme prejudice". Both that argument and his "no actual loss" theory are already being litigated in his pending appeal before the Second Circuit, which I wrote about here: https://www.citationneeded.news/issue-96/#sbf
"repayment doesn't negate fraud"
Like so many tech bros, completely ignorant of law and business. Sigh.
-
"repayment doesn't negate fraud"
Like so many tech bros, completely ignorant of law and business. Sigh.
@mwl Entitlement is a hell of a drug.
-
And finally he demands Judge Kaplan recuse himself, arguing he showed "extreme prejudice". Both that argument and his "no actual loss" theory are already being litigated in his pending appeal before the Second Circuit, which I wrote about here: https://www.citationneeded.news/issue-96/#sbf
@molly0xfff Sounds like the classic "it didn't happen and also it's good that it happened and also it was somebody else's fault" defense...
-
Pardon seeking. Sigh.
The wealthy think that if they pay "compensation" that the crime wasn't real.
