

Sam Bankman-Fried’s affidavit has arrived. He says his attorneys of record had no input into his motion for a new trial, but that he shared drafts with his parents (both attorneys). “They made editorial and organizational suggestions, some of which I incorporated”
He also writes “As I have had to focus on responding to these questions rather than drafting a response to the prosecution's opposition, and because I do not believe I will get a fair hearing on this topic in front of you, I am now requesting to withdraw the Rule 33 motion” (for a new trial)
Laughing out loud to this 27 March piece from @molly0xfff was less painful than crying or banging my head on my desk. I listened to Molly reading it at https://www.citationneeded.news/sam-bankman-frieds-helicopter-parents/ where I could imagine her reading it poker faced, while my brain was exploding at hearing the utter absurdity of some of the actions by Sam Bankman-Fried and his mommy.
The title of the piece is genius: "Sam Bankman-Fried’s helicopter parents crash into federal court". When I heard mommy had been a professor emerita of LEGAL ETHICS at Stanford, and then I heard all the trick she and daddy pulled, OMFG.
Molly White writes brilliantly and beautifully, and I had a good laugh at the absurd parts. In reality, the whole thing is frightening because powerful people who know other powerful people are getting away with this bizarro behaviour. Thank goodness for a judge with courage and intelligence, but he does need a massive deflector shield to not fold under the onslaught of accusations from mommy who is concerned about her baby boy.
(If in doubt, I use the terms "mommy" and "baby boy" with complete derision and disgust.)
Consider giving Molly White a follow at Citation Needed for an excellent newsletter (that I am always behind in reading because I subscribe to too many things at the moment).
Newsletter: As they angle for a presidential pardon in television interviews, Sam Bankman-Fried’s law professor parents file “pro se” motions for their adult son, leave voicemails with the judge, and sign documents claiming they're from him in prison.
#crypto #cryptocurrency #FTX #SBF
https://www.citationneeded.news/sam-bankman-frieds-helicopter-parents/
And finally he demands Judge Kaplan recuse himself, arguing he showed "extreme prejudice". Both that argument and his "no actual loss" theory are already being litigated in his pending appeal before the Second Circuit, which I wrote about here: https://www.citationneeded.news/issue-96/#sbf
His motion mainly argues that two former FTX employees who didn't testify (Daniel Chapsky and Ryan Salame) would have undercut prosecutors' narrative, but were threatened out of testifying. He also claims Nishad Singh was coerced by prosecutors into changing his testimony.
It also repeats his longstanding argument that the funds were never missing and that FTX was never insolvent. (Judge Kaplan got a bit sick of this argument during trial, pointing out that repayment doesn't negate fraud).
Sam Bankman-Fried has just filed a pro se motion for a new trial, via his mother
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66631292/583/united-states-v-bankman-fried/