Lewis Kaplan

FTX’s Bankman-Fried could ‘conceivably’ get bail revoked, says judge

A federal judge said there was “probable cause” to believe that SBF engaged in activities that could land him in jail.

Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried could “conceivably” have his bail revoked after a federal judge said there was “probable cause” to believe he may have engaged in attempted witness tampering.

In the Feb. 16 hearing on Bankman-Fried’s bail conditions, Judge Lewis Kaplan said there was “probable cause to believe that he [Bankman-Fried] has committed or attempted to commit a federal felony while on release, namely witness tampering” according to multiple reports.

Kaplan suggested that this could “conceivably” see the FTX founder sent back to jail until his trial date in October.

Kaplan noted however that the Feb. 16 hearing was not a bail revocation hearing, but added that it “could get there, conceivably.”

“Why am I being asked to turn him loose in this garden of electronic devices?” Kaplan reportedly said.

Law Professor Richard Painter echoed the sentiment in a Feb. 17 tweet, suggesting that witness tampering might not be a good idea given his current circumstances:

“Hey Crypto Bro: Witness tampering while out on bail is a great way to go right back to jail.”

On Feb. 15, prosecutors asked Judge Kaplan to further restrict Bankman-Fried’s device usage to a single monitored computer and cellphone in a letter.

Prosecutors had pointed to Bankman-Fried’s recent device usage as cause for concern, seeking to further restrict and monitor his usage “with limited exceptions.”

During the hearing, Judge Kaplan suggested that it was naive to believe that these restrictions would stop him from using the internet, given that Bankman-Fried is living with his two parents, who both have laptops and cellphones.

Prosecutor Nicholas Roos seemingly agreed, suggesting there may not be a “great solution,” which prompted Kaplan to imply that revoking Bankman-Fried’s bail could eliminate these risks, noting:

“There is a solution, but it’s not one anybody has proposed yet.”

Bankman-Fried’s lawyers however argued that they need him to be able to work on his defense, claiming: “We cannot go through these extensive financial records without him.”

The former FTX CEO has been prohibited from using certain messaging apps as of Feb. 9 after he was found to have contacted potential witnesses. He was also temporarily banned from using a VPN after prosecutors accused him of using it on two occasions on Jan. 29 and Feb. 12.

The VPN ban was not extended in the Feb. 16 hearing.

Many from the crypto community have expressed disbelief that Bankman-Fried is yet to have his bail revoked under the circumstances.

Yes, why? What exactly does @SBF_FTX have on the prosecution that they’re not demanding his bail be immediately revoked? Or do they think he can take down @binance if he flips? Is he waving that at them? Because none of this makes sense otherwise. https://t.co/l66Qls0d46

— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) February 16, 2023

FTX’s Bankman-Fried could ‘conceivably’ have bail revoked, says judge

A federal judge said there was “probable cause” to believe that SBF engaged in activities that could land him in jail until his trial in October.

Sam Bankman-Fried could “conceivably” have his bail revoked after a federal judge said there was “probable cause” to believe the former FTX CEO may have engaged in attempted witness tampering.

During a Feb. 16 hearing on Bankman-Fried’s bail conditions, Judge Lewis Kaplan said there was “probable cause to believe that he [Bankman-Fried] has committed or attempted to commit a federal felony while on release, namely witness tampering,” according to multiple reports.

Kaplan suggested that this could “conceivably” see the FTX founder sent back to jail until his trial in October.

Kaplan noted however that the Feb. 16 hearing was not a bail revocation hearing, but added that it “could get there, conceivably.”

“Why am I being asked to turn him loose in this garden of electronic devices?” Kaplan reportedly said.

Law professor Richard Painter echoed the sentiment in a Feb. 17 tweet, suggesting that witness tampering might not be a good idea given his current circumstances:

“Hey Crypto Bro: Witness tampering while out on bail is a great way to go right back to jail.”

On Feb. 15, prosecutors asked Judge Kaplan to further restrict Bankman-Fried’s device usage to a single monitored computer and cellphone.

Prosecutors pointed to Bankman-Fried’s recent device usage as cause for concern, seeking to further restrict and monitor his usage “with limited exceptions.”

Prosecutor Nicholas Roos seemingly agreed, suggesting there may not be a “great solution,” which prompted Kaplan to imply that revoking Bankman-Fried’s bail could eliminate these risks, noting:

“There is a solution, but it’s not one anybody has proposed yet.”

Bankman-Fried’s lawyers, however, argued that they need him to be able to work on his defense, claiming: “We cannot go through these extensive financial records without him.”

The former FTX CEO has been prohibited from using certain messaging apps since Feb. 9, after he was found to have contacted potential witnesses. He was also temporarily banned from using a VPN after prosecutors accused him of using it on two occasions, on Jan. 29 and Feb. 12.

The VPN ban was not extended at the Feb. 16 hearing.

Many both in and out of the crypto community have expressed disbelief that Bankman-Fried is yet to have his bail revoked under the circumstances.

Yes, why? What exactly does @SBF_FTX have on the prosecution that they’re not demanding his bail be immediately revoked? Or do they think he can take down @binance if he flips? Is he waving that at them? Because none of this makes sense otherwise. https://t.co/l66Qls0d46

— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) February 16, 2023

Sam Bankman-Fried may no longer be allowed to play League of Legends

Sam Bankman-Fried is, for the most part, still able to freely access the internet through various devices. Prosecutors want to change that.

Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of crypto exchange FTX, may no longer be able to play League of Legends and other video games if newly proposed changes to his bail conditions from United States prosecutors are approved.

In a Feb. 15 letter to United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan, U.S. Attorney Damian Williams asked the court to further expand restrictions surrounding Bankman-Fried’s electronic device usage.

They pointed to Bankman-Fried’s recent device usage as cause for concern, and agreed with the court’s intuition that it was “shortsighted” to focus only on restricting the use of apps, adding:

“There is now a record before the Court of a defendant who appears motivated to circumvent monitoring and find loopholes in existing bail conditions. The appropriate course, therefore, is broader restrictions on the defendant’s cellphone, tablet, computer, and internet usage, with limited exceptions.”

The prosecutors propose that Bankman-Fried should be prohibited from using cellphones, tablets, computers, or the internet, except for very limited uses such as reviewing pre-trial evidence, communicating with lawyers and accessing emails.

Here’s the list of proposed new bail restrictions that SBF is going completely ignore, without any real consequences https://t.co/cMVCdmRAj3

— Sean Tuffy (@SMTuffy) February 15, 2023

He would be restricted to using a single computer and cell phone, which in addition to his Gmail account would be monitored using a “pen register” — a device or process that essentially produces a list of phone numbers of internet addresses contacted from a specific source.

Bankman-Fried is understood to be an avid gamer, having reportedly played online video games such as League of Legends during fundraising rounds while at FTX.

Bankman-Fried also mentioned during an interview with New York Times on Nov. 13 that he likes to play games, as it helps him “unwind a bit” and clear his mind.

Under the newly proposed bail conditions, it appears that Bankman-Fried will no longer be allowed to partake in the activity.

Earlier this month, the former CEO was prohibited from using encrypted messaging apps after he was found to have contacted potential witnesses in his criminal case.

He has also been temporarily banned from using VPNs on Feb. 14, after the Justice Department discovered he had used a VPN on two different occasions — in order to watch sports coverage. This ban will be further discussed during a Feb. 16 hearing.

Many from the crypto community were disgusted by the initial conditions of Bankman-Fried’s bail, which required him to wear an ankle bracelet but afforded him full computer and internet access from his parents luxurious home in sunny California.

SBF will be spending Christmas at home with his parents playing video games rather than locked up in a cell. What kind of justice is that?

— Layah Heilpern (@LayahHeilpern) December 23, 2022

SBF’s lawyers move to block release of bail guarantors’ identities

The appeal, filed on the last possible day, prevents the names of two bond guarantors for SBF from being revealed until at least Feb. 14.

The names of two guarantors who signed off on part of Sam Bankman-Fried’s $250 million bail bond will continue to remain a secret for now.

A judge has also rejected an agreement that would have permitted Bankman-Fried to use certain messaging apps.

Bankman Fried’s lawyers filed an appeal to block the release of the guarantors’ names last-minute on Feb. 7. The appeal did not contain further arguments against the disclosure but it will prevent the order from being enforced until Feb. 14 to allow for an application for a further stay.

The appeal was expected after a Jan. 30 ruling in which United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan granted a joint petition from eight major media outlets seeking to unseal the guarantors’ names.

*Sam Bankman-Fried in an interview during the Bitcoin 2021 conference. Source:* *Cointelegraph*

At the time, Kaplan noted his order was likely to be appealed given the novelty of the circumstances.

He stated arguments by Bankman-Fried’s lawyers that guarantors “would face similar intrusions” as Bankman-Fried’s parents lacked merit given the size of their individual bonds was much smaller, at $200,000 and $500,000.

Bankman Fried’s parents — Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried — were the other two parties who signed off on the bond.

Additionally, the judge said the guarantors had voluntarily signed individual bonds in a “highly publicized criminal proceeding,” and had therefore opened themselves up to public scrutiny.

Meanwhile, on Feb. 7 Kaplan rejected a joint agreement between Bankman-Fried’s legal team and prosecutors that would have modified bail conditions and allowed Bankman-Fried to use certain messaging apps.

Kaplan did not provide a reason for denying the motion but added the subject would be further discussed in a Feb. 9 hearing.

Kaplan ruled on Feb. 1 that Bankman-Fried was barred from contacting FTX or Alameda Research employees citing a risk of “inappropriate contact with prospective witnesses” after it was revealed the former CEO had been contacting past and present staff.

SBF’s $250M bail guarantors should be made public, rules judge

A Jan. 30 ruling could see the identities of the two individuals who signed on as sureties for Sam Bankman-Fried’s $250 million bond become public, subject to appeal.

The two people who helped former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried with his $250 million bail bond could have their identities revealed next month after a recent ruling by United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan.

According to the Jan. 30 filing, Kaplan granted the joint petition from eight media outlets to unseal the names of the two individuals, “for the limited purpose of asserting the public’s claimed right of access” to the identities. He noted, however, that there was not much weight in favor of either side of the argument.

An unsealing of the guarantors’ names also isn’t guaranteed, as Kaplan has given Bankman-Fried’s legal counsel until Feb. 7 to contest the decision. The judge wrote that an “appeal is likely” and stated that “if a notice of appeal from this order is filed by then,” he would extend the deadline to Feb. 14 to permit an application for a further stay to be made.

Bankman-Fried was released from custody in December after two unknown people signed on as sureties for the $250 million bond along with Bankman-Fried’s parents, Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried.

Eight major media companies — including Bloomberg, the Financial Times and Reuters — demanded public disclosure of the two individuals responsible for guaranteeing the bond in a Jan. 12 letter addressed to District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan.

Attorneys from Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, acting on behalf of the media giants, insist that “the public’s right to know Bankman-Fried’s guarantors outweighed their privacy and safety rights.”

Bankman-Fried’s lawyers have, however, continued to argue that their identities should be kept a secret, as his parents have already been the subject of threats and the FTX founder and those linked to him face serious security risks.

In his ruling, Kaplan said he has “no reason” to doubt threats had occurred but was yet to see “evidence to that effect,” adding:

“But it does not follow that the non-parental sureties would face similar threats and harassment.”

Kaplan further argued that Bankman-Fried’s parents faced intense scrutiny due to their close relationship with their son, and his father’s employment at FTX for a year prior to the exchange’s collapse.

“Thus, the defendant’s claim that the non-parental sureties would face similar intrusions is speculative and only entitled to modest weight,” he said.

“Moreover, the information sought, ie, the names of the bail sureties, traditionally is public information,” Kaplan added.

In a Jan. 19 court filing, the lawyers for the former FTX CEO claimed that three men drove a car into the metal barricade outside Bankman-Fried’s parents’ home, where he is under house arrest.

The unidentified trio was reportedly able to drive away before security guards could record the car’s license plate.

Major media want answers: Who guaranteed Bankman-Fried’s $250M bail?

The media’s lawyers argued the public’s right to know Bankman-Fried’s sureties outweighed their privacy and safety rights, but Bankman-Fried’s lawyers strongly disagreed.

Eight major media companies — including Bloomberg, the Financial Times and Reuters — have demanded public disclosure of the two individuals responsible for guaranteeing FTX former CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s $250 million bond.

In a Jan. 12 letter addressed to New York District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan, attorneys from Davis Wright Tremaine LLP — acting on behalf of the media giants — argued that “the public’s right to know Bankman-Fried’s guarantors outweighed their privacy and safety rights.”

“The public […] has an interest in knowing who it is that provided Mr. Bankman-Fried with financial backing.”

“[Particularly] given Mr. Bankman-Fried’s close relationships with leaders of the financial industry, investors, prominent Silicon Valley billionaires, and elected representatives,” they argued.

The other media organizations looking to persuade the judge to unseal the identities of Bankman-Fried’s guarantors are the Associated Press, CNBC, Dow Jones, Insider and the Washington Post.

*Screenshot of the letter sent to Judge Kaplan. Source: Davis Wright Tremaine LLP*

The attorneys also argued that given Bankman-Fried’s close ties to “some of the most wealthy, powerful, and politically connected individuals” on the planet, such non-disclosure could possibly undermine “public confidence in our government institutions and political leaders.”

The media lawyers also argued that while a 2020 case involving Jeffrey Epstein confidant Ghislaine Maxwell saw her bond guarantors sealed, Bankman-Fried’s alleged financial crimes are not nearly as serious as what Maxwell was accused of:

“While Mr. Bankman-Fried is accused of serious financial crimes, a public association with him does not carry nearly the same stigma as with the Jeffrey Epstein child sex trafficking scandal.”

The letter came in response to the court’s decision on Jan. 3 to approve Bankman-Fried’s request to redact the names and identifying information of his two non-parental bail sureties.

According to a Jan. 12 report from Reuters, Bankman-Fried’s lawyers previously argued that Bankman-Fried’s sureties should be kept under wraps as Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried — the parents and co-signers of Bankman-Fried’s $250 million bond — have received ongoing physical threats since FTX’s catastrophic collapse in early November.

If the guarantor’s names were revealed, there would be a “serious cause for concern” for the safety and welfare of those two people, Bankman-Fried’s lawyers argued.

The names of Bankman-Fried’s guarantors aren’t the only names mainstream media have asked to be disclosed publicly.

Several media outlets also called on Delaware-based Judge John Dorsey overlooking FTX‘s bankruptcy case to disclose the names of up to nine million customers entangled in the court proceedings.

However, bankruptcy judge John Dorsey has ruled on Jan. 11 to keep creditor information private for the time being.

Update Jan. 13, 3:45 am UTC: Added additional quotes in from Davis Wright Tremaine LLP’s letter addressed to Judge Lewis Kaplan.