Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. General Discussion
  3. 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

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
cryptosbf
1 Cross-posts 20 Posts 16 Posters 5 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

    Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother

    ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

    favicon

    (www.courtlistener.com)

    #crypto #SBF

    Link Preview Image
    molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
    molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
    molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
    wrote last edited by
    #7

    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).

    #crypto #SBF

    molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM cshlan@dawdling.netC 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

      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).

      #crypto #SBF

      molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
      molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
      molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
      wrote last edited by
      #8

      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

      #crypto #SBF

      magentarocks@mastodon.coffeeM mwl@io.mwl.ioM nentuaby@wandering.shopN 3 Replies Last reply
      2
      0
      • ryan@m29.usR ryan@m29.us

        @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.

        molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
        molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
        molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
        wrote last edited by
        #9

        @ryan he's referring to the `allow_negative` flag: https://www.citationneeded.news/the-fraud-was-in-the-code/

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • joshg@mathstodon.xyzJ joshg@mathstodon.xyz

          @molly0xfff
          his mother is a law professor at Stanford

          his mother

          is a law professor
          at

          ... god why is this timeline so fucking ridiculous

          molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
          molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
          molly0xfff@hachyderm.io
          wrote last edited by
          #10

          @joshg was*

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
            R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
          • incentiveI incentive moved this topic from Uncategorized
          • riley@toot.catR riley@toot.cat

            @molly0xfff That's a good sign. Means that he can't afford to buy a pardon.

            daarin@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
            daarin@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
            daarin@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #11

            @molly0xfff @riley
            Maybe he just tries to lower the price

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

              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

              #crypto #SBF

              magentarocks@mastodon.coffeeM This user is from outside of this forum
              magentarocks@mastodon.coffeeM This user is from outside of this forum
              magentarocks@mastodon.coffee
              wrote last edited by
              #12

              @molly0xfff

              Pardon seeking. Sigh.

              npars01@mstdn.socialN 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

                Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother

                ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

                favicon

                (www.courtlistener.com)

                #crypto #SBF

                Link Preview Image
                tehabe@norden.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                tehabe@norden.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                tehabe@norden.social
                wrote last edited by
                #13

                @molly0xfff is it normal not to redact her email address and phone number? at least the email address looks private.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

                  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).

                  #crypto #SBF

                  cshlan@dawdling.netC This user is from outside of this forum
                  cshlan@dawdling.netC This user is from outside of this forum
                  cshlan@dawdling.net
                  wrote last edited by
                  #14

                  @molly0xfff
                  I'm not a great bookkeeper but these people just continue to make me itch.

                  #crypto #SBF

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

                    Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother

                    ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

                    favicon

                    (www.courtlistener.com)

                    #crypto #SBF

                    Link Preview Image
                    fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                    fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                    fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #15

                    @molly0xfff Is

                    "please receive this humble pro se filing

                    -sincerely, high-powered lawyer" as incongruous as it looks?

                    dec23k@mastodon.ieD 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.socialF fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.social

                      @molly0xfff Is

                      "please receive this humble pro se filing

                      -sincerely, high-powered lawyer" as incongruous as it looks?

                      dec23k@mastodon.ieD This user is from outside of this forum
                      dec23k@mastodon.ieD This user is from outside of this forum
                      dec23k@mastodon.ie
                      wrote last edited by
                      #16

                      @molly0xfff @fuzzyfuzzyfungus
                      "Emeritus/Emerita is an adjective that means no longer having a position, especially in a college or university, but keeping the title."

                      Link Preview Image
                      emeritus

                      EMERITUS definition: 1. no longer having a position, especially in a college or university, but keeping the title of the…. Learn more.

                      favicon

                      (dictionary.cambridge.org)

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

                        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

                        #crypto #SBF

                        mwl@io.mwl.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
                        mwl@io.mwl.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
                        mwl@io.mwl.io
                        wrote last edited by
                        #17

                        @molly0xfff

                        "repayment doesn't negate fraud"

                        Like so many tech bros, completely ignorant of law and business. Sigh.

                        tripleman@mastodon.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • mwl@io.mwl.ioM mwl@io.mwl.io

                          @molly0xfff

                          "repayment doesn't negate fraud"

                          Like so many tech bros, completely ignorant of law and business. Sigh.

                          tripleman@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                          tripleman@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                          tripleman@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #18

                          @mwl Entitlement is a hell of a drug.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • molly0xfff@hachyderm.ioM molly0xfff@hachyderm.io

                            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

                            #crypto #SBF

                            nentuaby@wandering.shopN This user is from outside of this forum
                            nentuaby@wandering.shopN This user is from outside of this forum
                            nentuaby@wandering.shop
                            wrote last edited by
                            #19

                            @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...

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • magentarocks@mastodon.coffeeM magentarocks@mastodon.coffee

                              @molly0xfff

                              Pardon seeking. Sigh.

                              npars01@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                              npars01@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
                              npars01@mstdn.social
                              wrote last edited by
                              #20

                              @MagentaRocks @molly0xfff

                              The wealthy think that if they pay "compensation" that the crime wasn't real.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups