Day 15 of the Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) trial started with the prosecution persevering with its cross-examination of the defendant and concluded with the protection resting its case and getting ready for closing arguments.

The day’s proceedings revolved round scrutinizing SBF’s relationship with the Bahamian authorities, dealing with buyer funds, and transparency points. The protection carried out a re-direct examination to make clear the previous billionaire’s stance on a few of the factors raised by the prosecution.

The prosecution additionally stated it not intends to deliver rebuttal witnesses to the stand, which implies the trial will seemingly conclude sooner than anticipated.

Cross-examination continues

The prosecution began the cross with questions on SBF’s relationship with the Bahamian authorities, particularly Prime Minister Philip Davis.

SBF acknowledged that he had cultivated relations with some members of the federal government. Nevertheless, when requested about discussions associated to paying off the Bahamian nationwide debt, SBF claimed to not bear in mind.

The prosecution continued by questioning SBF about his involvement in serving to the PM’s son safe a job, to which SBF responded that he had talked with him however didn’t recall the small print.

AUSA Sassoon then requested whether or not SBF had ever boasted that Ryan Salame was basically a member of the Bahamian authorities. SBF once more claimed he didn’t bear in mind.

The prosecution launched proof within the type of an exhibit, known as “Mission Chinchilla Chatter,” which included a message the place SBF acknowledged Ryan Salame’s identify. SBF admitted to writing the message.

AUSA Sassoon pressed additional, asking whether or not SBF had given the Bahamas Prime Minister floor-side seats on the Miami Warmth Enviornment. SBF acknowledged that he didn’t recall such an occasion. Nevertheless, the prosecution introduced a message the place SBF talked about the PM being in FTX’s court-side seats together with his spouse.

The road of questioning then shifted to SBF’s interactions with outstanding figures, together with Invoice Clinton and Tony Blair. SBF confirmed that he had invited them to an occasion, mentioning his introduction to Invoice Clinton via Michael Kives.

The prosecution performed a video that includes SBF alongside Invoice Clinton, Tony Blair, Katy Perry, and Orlando Bloom to additional cement its level.

Sassoon questioned whether or not SBF allowed the Bahamas Prime Minister to withdraw funds. SBF clarified that it was one other member of the federal government who sought withdrawals.

The prosecution introduced an electronic mail allegedly authorizing Bahamian clients to withdraw and be made complete, which SBF confirmed. Nevertheless, SBF defined that this authorization was for a brief interval.

Concerning monetary issues, Sassoon inquired whether or not banks had been reluctant to transact with a crypto trade. SBF expressed uncertainty concerning the which means of “transact” on this context. The prosecution additionally questioned him about his actions after discovering out concerning the $8 billion shortfall.

SBF stated he had realized concerning the bug that prompted the discrepancy however didn’t inquire about it.

The prosecution then centered on a monetary matter associated to North Dimension, asking if SBF was conscious of deposits being directed there. SBF admitted to turning into conscious of it in some unspecified time in the future however famous that it didn’t point out Alameda Analysis.

The prosecution additionally requested SBF if he had disclosed that Alameda was spending out of buyer deposits. The previous billionaire claimed that he believed he had not revealed it and expressed remorse at not doing so.

The questioning concluded with AUSA Sassoon asking concerning the people on each the buying and selling and settlement groups. SBF stated he didn’t recall particular particulars about specific staff’ roles.

Protection makes an attempt to make clear SBF’s stance

Following the extreme cross-examination, SBF’s protection crew took the chance to query his consumer through the re-direct examination. It allowed SBF to supply context and nuance to his responses and reinforce sure elements of his testimony.

The protection primarily addressed issues concerning SBF’s involvement within the Robin Hood litigation. SBF defined that his legal professional was assigned to deal with the return of shares to chapter, and his intention was to not assert management over these shares.

This clarification emphasised that he was following authorized procedures concerning the Robin Hood shares.

The protection additionally delved into SBF’s familiarity with the AWS database. SBF defined that he had familiarized himself with the database, indicating a common understanding of its operations. This perception was seemingly supplied to make clear SBF’s degree of involvement within the technical elements of the FTX platform.

The re-direct examination allowed SBF to handle the challenges related to managing buyer accounts and the complexity of the cryptocurrency trade enterprise. SBF seemingly aimed to convey that operating such a platform concerned intricate and multifaceted duties.

Cost consideration

The prosecution and protection took a sidebar for cost consideration on the finish of the proceedings. The sidebar revolved round debates concerning the language used within the indictment, with SBF’s lawyer objecting to fees that omitted the misappropriation idea.

The protection emphasised the necessity for specificity within the indictment. Nevertheless, Choose Kaplan overruled this objection, highlighting the significance of readability within the fees.

The prosecution raised issues about language within the indictment associated to marketing campaign finance fees. The prosecution requested that the time period “alleged” be stricken when referring to straw donations. The protection didn’t object to this adjustment.

The prosecution additionally sought to incorporate a jury instruction on the idea of acutely aware avoidance, significantly in gentle of SBF’s declare that he overheard details about sure monetary issues however didn’t take motion. The protection opposed this instruction, nevertheless it was in the end included within the cost.

One step nearer to the decision

With the cross-examination and re-direct examination full, the trial of SBF strikes nearer to its conclusion. The following section will contain closing arguments, throughout which each the prosecution and the protection will current their last arguments to the jury.

The prosecution and the protection estimated that their closing statements would final roughly two to a few hours every. Nevertheless, the potential for the trial extending into Thursday prompted issues for Juror 3, who has a flight to attend on the identical day.

Whereas SBF’s lawyer proposed seating an alternate juror to accommodate Juror 3’s journey plans, the prosecution was not ready to consent to that concept. In consequence, the trial could break on Thursday, relying on the progress of closing arguments.

The closing arguments will present either side with the chance to summarize their instances and persuade the jury earlier than deliberations start.

The prosecution additionally requested to current a rebuttal after the protection’s closing arguments. The protection didn’t object to the proposal, indicating a willingness to accommodate it.

Because the trial nears its conclusion, the destiny of Sam Bankman-Fried will quickly be within the palms of the jury, who will decide the decision based mostly on the proof and arguments introduced all through the trial.