The clash between the Small Business Administration (SBF) and the Department of Justice (DoJ) escalates as they disagree over witnesses and jury selection in an ongoing case. This contentious dispute has significant implications for the outcome and fairness of the trial. Learn more about this clash and its potential consequences in our latest article.
Sam Bankman-Fried’s Court Case: Final Preparations Underway
As the court date approaches, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is making the final arrangements for Sam Bankman-Fried’s upcoming trial. In order to ensure an impartial jury, the DOJ has taken the time to formulate a list of questions for potential jurors to determine any potential biases.
Key Areas of Interest for the Jury
One of the crucial questions on the list is whether any of the jury members have been investors with ties to the FTX empire, either currently or in the past. This is important because investors who have lost funds due to Bankman-Fried’s mishandling of the exchange’s finances may hold biases against him, which could impact the fairness of the trial. Additionally, the court has inquired about any previous or ongoing interactions the jurors may have had with the US Justice system, FTX Group employees and companies, or startup companies in general.
The document also outlines the importance of understanding the jurors’ familiarity with blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies. It asks whether they have heard about the case and how, as well as their level of knowledge about digital assets. These questions aim to gauge the jurors’ understanding of the subject matter and their potential biases.
“Do you have any familiarity with FTX.com or Alameda Research? Are any of you familiar with, or have you had any dealings, directly or indirectly, with FTX, Alameda Research, or their affiliates? Have you invested in cryptocurrency, or digital assets more broadly? Do you have any familiarity with cryptocurrency or digital assets?”
The document indicates that the trial is expected to last approximately six weeks, providing a prospective time frame for the resolution of the case.
DOJ’s Bias Accusation Against SBF’s Witnesses
Meanwhile, the DOJ has requested the dismissal of Sam Bankman-Fried’s expert witnesses, arguing that their opinions would confuse the jury and qualify as “inadmissible hearsay testimony.” This move has been met with criticism from Bankman-Fried’s legal team, who claim it is an unfair attempt to limit their defense. In response, the DOJ has opposed a motion to exclude Professor Peter Easton as an expert witness for the prosecution.
“The defendant’s motion to exclude Professor Easton’s testimony, which seeks total preclusion but is focused on discrete aspects of his testimony, is based on a misreading of the expert’s disclosure, is inconsistent with the case law, and has largely been mooted by the Government’s disclosure of draft exhibits. Professor Easton should be allowed to testify in full.”
Sam Bankman-Fried’s trial is scheduled to begin on the 2nd of October, with or without his expert witnesses.