Sam Bankman-Fried Denies Claims of Witness Tampering
- Sam Bankman-Fried has agreed to stop making any public comments that could paint any witness in a negative light. He, however, demanded that prosecutors and other parties involved observe the same order.
- The New York Times released an article last week that shed light on Bankman-Fried’s relationship with former Alameda CEO Cory Ellison.
- Bankman-Fried’s lawyer claimed his involvement in the story was part of his right to respond to an inquiry from the media.
Sam Bankman-Fried’s (SBF) lawyer, Mark Cohen, released a letter to Judge Lewis Kaplan denying the prosecutor’s claims that the 31-year-old’s conversation with a New York Times journalist was an act of witness tampering. Cohen claimed prosecutors were misinterpreting an event “where nothing improper or impermissible occurred.”
The letter came shortly after prosecutors sought to prevent Bankman-Fried and his allies from making comments that would affect the outcome of the case. In addition to agreeing to a gag order, SBF’s lawyers requested that the order be extended to the prosecution and potential witnesses, including FTX CEO John Ray.
In their letter, Sam Bankman-Fried’s attorneys confirmed that the former FTX CEO spoke with a New York Times reporter and shared documents for last week’s story about Cory Ellison, who has been listed as one of the prosecutor’s core witnesses. Ellison was the former CEO of Alameda Research and a former lover of Bankman-Fried.
Cohen denied that the former crypto billionaire intended to damage Ellison’s reputation and the jury pool by speaking to the reporter. He explained that “Bankman-Fried did not seek out The New York Times. The reporter approached our client to comment on a story in progress.”
Justifying SBF’s involvement in the piece, Cohen claimed that the New York Times article “implicated Mr. Bankman-Fried as much as it did Ms. Ellison, and our client agreed to provide his perspective.”
He also maintained that SBF interacted with the reporter as part of his right to respond to an inquiry from the media. The letter read,
Mr. Bankman-Fried did not violate the protective order in this case, nor did he violate his bail conditions, nor did he violate any law or rule governing his conduct. Rather, Mr. Bankman-Fried was exercising his rights under the First and Sixth Amendments to respond to an inquiry from the media.
Bankman-Fried’s attorneys argued that Ellison was favorably depicted in the New York Times article, unlike Bankman-Fried. Interestingly, the lawyers noted that Bankman-Fried has suffered public defamation from both FTX and its new management team, led by Ray John.
According to the letter,
Mr. Bankman Fried, who has asserted his innocence despite these public attacks, has a right to counter that public narrative by making fair comments in the media.
The letter also addressed rumors that Bankman-Fried’s interaction with the New York Times reporter violated his bail terms. The lawyers claimed that the “visit was far from secret.” They added that “Mr. Bankman-Fried followed all conditions and procedures under the bail conditions for receiving visitors, including having a security guard screen the reporter for prohibited electronic devices and entering the reporter’s name on the visitor log.”
Bankman-Fried’s trial is scheduled to begin in October. The former FTX CEO faces a number of criminal charges and could spend years behind bars if found guilty.
Lawrence has covered some exciting stories in his career as a journalist, he finds blockchain-related stories very intriguing. He believes Web3 will change the world and wants everyone to be a part of it.
