Key takeaways:
- After his attorneys admitted that he had sent Caroline Ellison’s journal to the New York Times, the US DOJ still requested that SBF be imprisoned while awaiting trial.
- The DOJ claims that SBF disseminated Ellison’s journal to “intimidate, harass, and embarrass” a witness who is expected to testify against him.
After his attorneys admitted that he had given Caroline Ellison’s diary to the New York Times, Sam Bankman-Fried, the discredited founder of FTX, remains under arrest pending trial at the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) insistence.
According to the August 3 complaint, the DOJ asserted that the former FTX CEO’s sharing of the diary went beyond expressing a reasonable comment and that this, along with his prior violations, was sufficient justification to imprison him.
The DOJ claims that SBF disseminated Ellison’s journal in an effort “to intimidate, harass, and embarrass” a witness who is expected to testify against him, in an effort to elicit an emotional response from prospective jurors, and in an effort to influence a prospective juror’s perception of that witness.
The DOJ added that SBF received a court warning as a result of its alleged prior interactions with a witness in January. The Court declared at the time that there was reason to think SBF “committed or attempted to commit” the federal offense of witness tampering or attempted witness tampering while in custody. But that hasn’t stopped him from doing something similar again. The DOJ stated:
“The record here establishes that the defendant went beyond benignly exercising a constitutional right to speak to the press—he took covert steps intended to improperly discredit a trial witness and taint the jury pool.”
The defense side asserts that the prosecution misrepresented SBF’s behavior, but the DOJ’s filing refutes that assertion. The Signal groups were initially created and configured by Bankman-Fried to erase messages after a week, according to the DOJ.
The DOJ asserts that the defense team is erring by describing how SBF purposefully impacted a witness and the public’s perception of a witness while attempting to cover his tracks.
Additionally, according to the prosecution, SBF was instrumental in fostering a “media atmosphere” that elevated Ellison’s profile prior to her testimony.
After the prosecutors made a motion to revoke SBF’s bail bond, the DOJ filed a second document. In the initial complaint, the prosecutors cited numerous instances in which SBF had broken the terms of his house imprisonment. Unauthorized contact with the General Counsel of FTX.US and using a VPN to watch the Super Bowl are examples of alleged infractions.
