2023-10-30 21:59:48
Former cryptocurrency figure Sam Bankman-Fried, on trial in New York, was jostled during his cross-examination on Monday, with the prosecution listing his contradictions one by one.
During the “SBF” hearing which began the previous week, his lawyer Mark Cohen had patiently sought to present, through his questions and his client’s responses, an entrepreneur in good faith, making sensible decisions, without criminal intent.
But Danielle Sassoon, representative of Brooklyn federal prosecutor Damian Williams, ostensibly sought, from the first minutes of the cross-examination, to tear apart this line of defense assembled during seven hours of hearing, Friday and Monday.
She questioned the accused regarding a series of public statements and, each time, regarding the gap between them and the actual situation or functioning of his companies.
“SBF” is on trial for having organized, without the knowledge of clients, the illegal use of funds deposited on its cryptocurrency exchange platform FTX, which went bankrupt in November 2022.
The money pumped into FTX fueled the often risky activities of his investment company Alameda Research.
In several interviews, granted following the failure of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried explained that he had distanced himself, long before the bankruptcy, from the management of Alameda, of which he remained the majority shareholder, to avoid any conflict of interest.
“Overall, I did not make decisions on the Alameda transactions, but I was not completely cut off from these operations,” nevertheless admitted Monday the man who faces up to 110 years in prison if convicted .
– Small arrangements –
Since the trial opened, three key witnesses – former collaborators – have affirmed that “SBF” was perfectly informed of the financial situation of the company and had done nothing to change its trajectory.
The prosecutor’s representative also cited several statements and tweets Monday claiming that protecting customer and investor funds was a “priority” as Alameda borrowed up to $14 billion in customer deposits, often to carry out high-risk transactions.
“I don’t remember exactly,” “I’m not sure,” the accused said tirelessly. Each time, Danielle Sassoon produced, in counterpoint, a document containing a damning statement or writing.
“SBF” has also been taken up on multiple occasions by federal judge Lewis Kaplan for digressions and imprecise answers.
The young thirty-year-old questioned, on several occasions, comments attributed to him in several articles, even if the statements were consistent from one publication to another.
The prosecutor also mentioned Sam Bankman-Fried’s numerous interventions in Congress (three times), during which he campaigned for more regulation of the cryptocurrency sector.
“Did you say: fuck the regulators?”, however, questioned Danielle Sassoon, ready to draw out a new document demonstrating it. “I said it once.”
The prosecution also detailed a series of public assertions by “SBF” that Alameda had “no privileged access” to FTX.
Still under fire from the prosecutor’s questions, “SBF” nevertheless recognized that Alameda benefited from a credit line of up to $65 billion, an amount which made it an exception on the platform.
The former digital currency idol also confirmed that Alameda was allowed to have a negative balance without providing collateral to FTX and might use the borrowed money elsewhere than on the platform, unlike all other customers.
Through her questioning, Danielle Sassoon also sought to highlight the accused’s perception of risk, notably consciously allowing Alameda’s financial situation to deteriorate.
After questioning the lawyers and the prosecution, Judge Kaplan estimated that the witness might still be questioned for most of the day Tuesday.
1698726707
#United #States #king #cryptocurrencies #heckled #crossexamination
