SBF's Pleas for Mistrial Fall Flat at Appeals Court

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit appeared unconvinced by Sam Bankman-Fried’s argument that his 2023 fraud trial was “fundamentally unfair” in Manhattan on Tuesday.

What's the Scoop?

• Solvency Claims Dashed: Alexandra Shapiro (Bankman-Fried’s attorney) argued in Court that SBF should receive a new trial because there were "very valuable assets in the FTX estate" at the time of bankruptcy to corroborate claims of solvency. Circuit Judges contended that the case hinged on liquidity and misrepresentation, and that fraud doesn’t require economic loss to be proven.
• Lawyer Defense Falls Flat: Shapiro also claimed that Bankman-Fried was the victim of ineffective counsel, arguing SBF was led astray by FTX’s lawyers, who did not allow the exchange founder allowed to sufficiently argue his position of solvency. Circuit Judges questioned the relevance of this claim, pointing out that SBF specifically declined to use an "advice-of-counsel" defense.
• Prosecutors Stand Firm: Assistant U.S. Attorney Nathan Rehn countered that overwhelming evidence of fraud was presented at trial, including testimony from three co-conspirators and internal documents confirming the misuse of customer funds.