Former cryptocurrency tycoon Sam Bankman-Fried is making one final push for freedom, petitioning the Supreme Court to grant him a new trial and scrap an $11 billion forfeiture order. Currently serving a 25 year prison sentence, Bankman-Fried was convicted of orchestrating a massive scheme that diverted billions from his FTX exchange into his private hedge fund, Alameda Research. Prosecutors successfully argued that these stolen funds fueled high risk bets and lavish personal spending, but the fallen mogul now claims the legal process was fundamentally unfair.
The core of the appeal rests on a complex technicality regarding how evidence was presented during his trial. His legal team argues that because the prosecution didn’t have to prove actual economic loss to secure a fraud conviction, they should not have been allowed to introduce evidence showing that customers had lost money. According to his attorney, Jeffrey Fisher, allowing such testimony while preventing Bankman-Fried from proving his investments were ultimately sound created a prejudicial environment that skewed the jury’s perception of the crime.
Bankman-Fried is attempting to build his case around a previous Supreme Court ruling involving a government contractor who lied about business partnerships but still completed their contracted work. While the court previously ruled in that instance that deception alone constitutes fraud regardless of whether financial harm occurred, Bankman-Fried suggests there is a nuance here. He contends that if economic loss isn’t necessary for a charge, then bringing it up at all serves only to distract and damage the defense.
Beyond the request for a new trial, Bankman-Fried is challenging the staggering $11 billion fine imposed as part of his sentencing. He argues that this amount is so extreme that it violates the Eighth Amendment’s protection against excessive fines. This latest attempt comes after the Second US Circuit Court of Appeals already rejected similar arguments earlier this year, leaving the highest court in the land as his remaining hope for relief. The Supreme Court is expected to review the appeal later this year.
