Former FTX boss Sam Bankman-Fried (c) leaving a New York court, July 26, 2023 (ANGELA WEISS)
Former cryptocurrency figure Sam Bankman-Fried was jostled from the start of his cross-examination Monday in his federal trial in New York, with the prosecution listing his contradictions one by one.
During the “SBF” hearing which began the previous week, his lawyer Mark Cohen had patiently sought to present, through his questions and his client’s responses, an entrepreneur in good faith, making sensible decisions, without criminal intent.
But Danielle Sassoon, representative of Brooklyn federal prosecutor Damian Williams, ostensibly sought, from the first minutes of the cross-examination, to tear apart this line of defense assembled during seven hours of hearing, Friday and Monday.
She questioned the accused about a series of public statements and, each time, about the gap between them and the actual situation or functioning of his companies.
“SBF” is on trial for having organized, without the knowledge of clients, the illegal use of funds deposited on its cryptocurrency exchange platform FTX, which went bankrupt in November 2022.
The money pumped into FTX fueled the often risky activities of his investment company Alameda Research.
In several interviews, granted after the failure of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried explained that he had distanced himself, long before the bankruptcy, from the management of Alameda, of which he remained the majority shareholder, to avoid any conflict of interest.
– Not cut –
“Overall, I did not make decisions on the Alameda transactions, but I was not completely cut off from these operations,” nevertheless admitted Monday the man who faces up to 110 years in prison if convicted .
Since the trial opened, three key witnesses – former collaborators – have affirmed that “SBF” was perfectly informed of the financial situation of the company and had done nothing to change its trajectory.
Read more
The prosecutor also cited several statements and tweets claiming that protecting customer and investor funds was a “priority” as Alameda borrowed up to $14 billion in customer deposits, often to make high-risk transactions.
“I don’t remember exactly,” “I’m not sure,” the accused said tirelessly. Each time, Danielle Sassoon produced, in counterpoint, a document containing a damning statement or writing.
The prosecutor also mentioned Sam Bankman-Fried’s numerous interventions in Congress (three times), during which he campaigned for more regulation of the cryptocurrency sector.
“Did you say: fuck the regulators?”, however, questioned Danielle Sassoon, ready to draw out a new document demonstrating it. “I said it once.”
The prosecution also detailed a series of public assertions by “SBF” that Alameda had “no privileged access” to FTX.
Still under fire from the prosecutor’s questions, “SBF” nevertheless recognized that Alameda benefited from a credit line of up to $65 billion, an amount which made it an exception on the platform.
The former digital currency idol also confirmed that Alameda was allowed to have a negative balance exceeding the value of all of its collateral without exposing itself to the closure of its account, unlike all other clients of FTX.
you/elm/cm
2023-10-30 19:36:34
#United #States #excryptocurrency #star #difficulty #crossexamination
