TLDR
- SBF demands new trial, says prosecutors hid key evidence
- Bankman-Fried claims witness pressure skewed FTX verdict
- New motion alleges unfair trial in 25-year FTX sentence
- SBF argues missing evidence distorted jury decision
- Bankman-Fried pushes retrial over disputed FTX losses
Sam Bankman-Fried moved to reopen his criminal case as he filed a new trial request through his mother, and he claimed federal prosecutors withheld information that could have changed the outcome. He argued that key witnesses stayed silent because they feared government pressure. Moreover, he now seeks another review of the fraud case that placed him in prison for 25 years.
New Filing Challenges Conduct of Prosecutors
Sam Bankman-Fried submitted a detailed motion that accused the Department of Justice of limiting access to evidence during the original proceedings. He argued that this withheld material undermined the credibility of claims made by cooperating witnesses. Furthermore, he stated that the absence of this information prevented a complete defense.
He also demanded the recusal of the previous judge and asserted that early decisions restricted his ability to counter several allegations. The filing said prosecutors controlled witness participation in ways that weakened the fairness of the trial. The motion urged the court to revisit actions that shaped the jury’s view.
Sam Bankman-Fried maintained that new statements from former colleagues contradicted earlier narratives presented in court. He said these accounts showed that some testimony relied on assumptions rather than verified data. Therefore, he argued the court must reconsider the accuracy of evidence used to convict him.
Claims Highlight Disputed Financial Picture of FTX
Sam Bankman-Fried repeated his claim that FTX faced only a liquidity shortage when the exchange collapsed in 2022. He argued the platform still held enough assets to meet customer withdrawals despite severe pressure. Moreover, he said public statements overstated the scale of permanent losses.
He also insisted that new accounts from former executives supported his argument that billions in assets remained recoverable. These accounts, according to the filing, challenged the prosecution’s portrayal of a massive and unrecoverable deficit. Consequently, he argued that jurors lacked critical financial context.
Sam Bankman-Fried said two former employees intended to testify but hesitated due to reported pressure from authorities. He claimed their statements would have challenged assertions about spending, travel, and internal fund movements. As a result, he said the court should consider whether their absence influenced jury perception.
Appeal Efforts Continue Despite Limited Political Support
Sam Bankman-Fried continues to appeal his conviction while pursuing broader relief through his new trial request. He previously fired his appellate attorney and began representing himself. He claimed public narratives shaped expectations before and during his trial.
He also attempted to link his case to wider disputes involving political figures, though those efforts produced no legal gains. Former President Donald Trump publicly ruled out granting him a pardon. Sam Bankman-Fried continues to argue that political motives shaped parts of his prosecution.
His continued filings show no sign of slowing as he pursues every available legal path. He maintains that new evidence warrants another review of his conviction. However, the court has not yet indicated whether it will consider his request
