The jury is set to deliberate shortly in the trial of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, with closing arguments scheduled for first thing Wednesday morning. The defense rested its case mid-day Tuesday following weeks of testimony from former FTX executives.
Jury Deliberations and Potential Verdict
On Tuesday afternoon, Judge Kaplan, the government, and the defense held a charge conference to further determine instructions for the jury before they begin their deliberations. The jury was sent home mid-day as the parties hammered out final details. It is unclear how long the jury may take before reaching a verdict, however, Bankman-Fried finds himself in a challenging position.
If convicted, Bankman-Fried faces a maximum sentence of over 100 years in prison. Less than 1% of federal criminal defendants were acquitted in 2022, further highlighting the uphill battle Bankman-Fried is facing.
The Defense’s Strategy and Testimonies
Bankman-Fried has continually deflected responsibility off of himself, instead shifting blame towards co-conspirators Ellison, Singh, and Wang, while insisting he acted in good faith. However, the testimony from Ellison was particularly damaging to his case.
“During her time on the witness stand, Ellison painted Bankman-Fried as a ‘distant’ boyfriend during their years-long tumultuous relationship. Moreover, she claimed she was made to feel like ‘an unequal partner’ throughout their romance, citing concerns ‘about the intersection of our personal and professional relationship.'” – Tim Enneking
Ellison, Singh, and Wang testified against Bankman-Fried under a cooperation agreement with the US government. They all hoped for a reduced sentence in exchange for their testimonies. According to Enneking, Ellison’s testimony was the most damaging, as it revealed Bankman-Fried’s character and management style at Alameda Research.
“Reflecting on her time at Alameda Research, Ellison claimed Bankman-Fried was a self-described utilitarian who believed ‘maximized utility’ was the only ‘moral rule that matters.'” – Tim Enneking
Bankman-Fried’s decision to testify came with the risk of contradicting himself on the stand. The prosecution pointed out inconsistencies between his prior statements and his testimony. While perjury is a possibility, Enneking noted that it is uncommon to be punished for it.
