Sam Bankman-Fried to propose revised bail package ‘by next week’
The lawyer representing crypto entrepreneur Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) in the ongoing FTX case will soon present a revised bail package to Judge Lewis Kaplan of the Southern District of New York. The move comes after Kaplan expressed displeasure about SBF’s use of encrypted-messaging apps and virtual private network (VPN) services while out on bail.
Legal proceedings around FTX’s downfall led SBF to avoid possible jail time with a $250 million bail bond. However, while on bond, the entrepreneur used Signal, an end-to-end encrypted messaging service, to contact former FTX and Alameda colleagues. Judge Kaplan forbade SBF from using such apps and threatened to revoke bail privileges if acted out of order.
Following up on this order, Bankman-Fried’s lawyer, Christian R. Everdell, revealed on March 18 that SBF and federal prosecutors “have been working diligently to agree on a set of specific bail conditions that will address the concerns expressed by the government and the court,” Bloomberg reported. In the letter, Everdell stated:
“We believe we are close to a resolution and anticipate being able to present the court with a proposed order outlining these conditions by next week.”
SBF maintains its innocence in claims against the misappropriation of FTX users’ funds. However, the entrepreneur could face 115 years of jail time if found guilty under the eight counts of crime.
Related: FTX debtors report $11.6B in claims, $4.8B in assets, with many crypto holdings ‘undetermined’
During the ongoing restructuring of FTX, the current administrators revealed that FTX and Alameda Research’s former top brass received $3.2 billion in payments and loans from FTX-linked entities.
Sharing the FTX Debtors’ press release just issued: https://t.co/r7PlneGSXF
— FTX (@FTX_Official) March 16, 2023
Out of the lot, Bankman-Fried reportedly received the lion’s share of the funds at $2.2 billion.
As Cointelegraph reported, FTX’s management is investigating its rights to pursue potential action against the recipients and their subsequent transferees.
Comments are closed.