In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell book

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 27 – Sam Bankman-Fried of FTX was indicted in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, leading to his arrest in the Bahamas on December 12, and extradition to the US on December 21. He was released on $250 million bond - and reappeared on January 3, see below - with the requirement of co-signers.

But he wants them secret: "LETTER MOTION addressed to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan from Mark S. Cohen dated January 3, 2023 re: Request to Redact Names and Identifying Information for Certain Bail Sureties . Document filed by Samuel Bankman-Fried. (Cohen, Mark)." Six page letter on Patreon here -
Inner City Press nearly immediately opposed, here. That was Docket Number 31. Even after that, other defendants had their co-signers named in open court, like hedge funder and fraud defendant Neil Phillips, here.

On January 11, Judge Kaplan gave Bankman-Fried until January 19 to respond: ORDER as to Samuel Bankman-Fried, Zixiao (Gary) Wang, Caroline Ellison: Any papers in response to Dkts 31 and 40 and any subsequent filings with respect to redaction of the names of sureties on appearance bonds for defendant Bankman-Fried shall be filed no later than January 19, 2023."

 Bankman-Fried waited until past 8 pm on January 19 to file - and then doubled down on secrecy. Letter on Inner City Press' Patreon here. And now its DocumentCloud here. As of January 27, still no ruling.

But on January 27, the US Attorney's Office asked for two conditions: "The Government writes to seek the modification of defendant Samuel Bankman-Fried’s conditions of pretrial release to impose two new conditions relating to his contact with prospective witnesses in the case. Specifically, the Government respectfully requests that the Court impose the following conditions: (1) the defendant shall not contact or communicate with current or former employees of FTX or Alameda (other than immediate family members) except in the presence of counsel, unless the Government or Court exempts an individual from this no-contact rule; and (2) the defendant shall not use any encrypted or ephemeral call or messaging application, including but not limited to Signal. For purposes of this motion" - full letter on Patreon here.

  Will the (un)sealing of co-signers motions be ruled on before this one?

SBF through his lawyer who previously represented Ghislaine Maxwell argues this secrecy is "the normal course" - it is not. Only recently a hedge funder charge with manipulating the price of the South African rand had his co-signers' names and amounts read out in open court. See here. SBF wants special treatment, as he's used to getting from Congress and regulators. He says "the Government consents. Should it? Watch this site.

The US Attorney's Office also released the plea agreements (signed December 19) of Caroline Ellison of Alameda (on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud here) and of Gary Wang - on Patreon here.

On January 3, Bankman-Fried appeared, pled not guilty, had a condition imposed and trial date set. Inner City Press live tweeted thread here:

OK - now Sam Bankman-Fried arraignment in SDNY. For his $250 million bond, he now wants names of co-signers to be withheld from the public 

Mark Cohen: He pleads not guilty to all charges.

Judge Kaplan: Thank you. I received this morning a letter seeking to redact the names and other identifying information - what is mean by this, Mr. Cohen?

Cohen: Names and addresses.

Judge Kaplan: I will grant that request without prejudice [Note: Inner City Press just submitted opposition]

Assistant US Attorney Sassoon: Alameda essentially had an unlimited line of credit on the exchange. Customer money was used to repay billions

 AUSA Sassoon: Money was also devoted to political contributions. This occurred with the defendant's knowledge and at his direction. He attempted to raise billions of dollars from equity investors. After tweets from the CEO of Binance, he tried to lull with tweets

AUSA Sassoon: In the next week we anticipate making a large discovery production, including from banks and political campaigns -- Judge Kaplan: This is from companies other than the companies with which the defendant was affiliated?

AUSA: Yes...on a rolling basis. AUSA: The AWS database of FTX --

 Judge: AWS?

AUSA: Amazon Web Services. We do not have custody of the complete database. But we will work to comply with our discovery obligations. Judge: When will you be finished? AUSA: The bulk in 2 weeks, all in four weeks

 AUSA: We'd like to propose a trial date, in September or October of this year. Cohen: We defer to the court. But we'd like September or October.  Judge: I took it to mean that there may be more materials, devices and accounts that need to be rendered intelligible

 Judge Kaplan: How long a trial? AUSA Sassoon: Four weeks. Cohen: Two to three weeks. Judge Kaplan: Trial on October 2, 2023. I may move that a day or so later or earlier. But that's what I'm shooting for. Now, let's set a motion schedule.

AUSA: Let the defense propose when to file their motions. Cohen: If we get the information by the end of February, we propose filing our motions by the end of April, if that works for the court. Judge Kaplan: Let's say April 3. April 24 for response, May 8 reply

Judge Kaplan: May 18, argument or conference. OK, any motion about time? AUSA: We move to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act. Judge: With no objection, exclusion of Speedy Trial Act time until October 2. Anything else? AUSA: Victim notification...

 AUSA: FTX was the second largest exchange, million - we will propose a web site, not individual notice. We propose a new condition, specifically that the defendant be prohibited from accessing or transferring any FTX or Alameda assets

Cohen: On Friday there was I guess a tweet alleging that Mr. Bankman-Fried had transferred assets, he had not. We contacted the government... They would like to supplement the conditions. We are speaking about language, we've exchanged drafts. Give us a day or 2

AUSA: The access of Alameda wallets, we do not have evidence that it was the defendant. Even in a few days, additional assets could be accessed. It's hard to understand that they won't agree to the condition. He has tweeted falsely before...

AUSA: He transferred assets to foreign regulators, knowing of the US Bankruptcy case. He thought the foreign regulators would be more lenient. So we feel a new condition is justified.

 Judge: It would address transferring what?

AUSA: Assets purchased with FTX funds

Judge: I impose that condition, I view it was warranted. Cohen: I'd like to respond.  Judge Kaplan: Why don't we save it until you are back before the Court on this, which I hope it not necessary. Cohen: He was ordered by the Bahamas court -

Judge: Not material

Judge: What's the status of any agreement on the signing of the bond by two additional persons?

AUSA: We have yet to set up the interviews. But we will, in the next day or two.

 Judge: Which insolvency proceeding was first, Delaware or the Bahamas? Cohen: Bahamas

 AUSA Sassoon: I'm no bankruptcy expert. But my understanding is that the Bahamian proceeding was filed in anticipation of the Delaware bankruptcy. Judge Kaplan: OK, we are adjourned.

Vlog here.

On December 22 when Bankman-Fried was presented and released on $250 million bond, with a condition that "Defendant not to enter into financial transactions in excess of $1,000 without pre-approval of the Government or Court, except to pay for legal costs and fees," see below. Inner City Press live tweeted, thread here.

  Since his release, and reassignment to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, it appears that Bankman-Fried has engaged in financial transactions / transfers:

ETH sent from SBF's public wallet to newly created address
0x7386df2Cf7e9776bCE0708072c27d6a7135D51CB which, within hours, received transfers totaling $367k from 32 known Alameda Research wallets

+ $322k from other wallets; all sent to a Seychelles CEX or Ren BTC bridge 0x7386 sent $629k to 0x64e9B9cD74A46f71e7631CB033afA6E7849a8683 which received a further $1M from 11 wallets labelled as Alameda Research

5 separate transactions of <51 ETH were used to move funds to newly created wallets then onwards to a Seychelles based exchange

3 tranches of 200k USDT were also sent from the SBF linked wallet to the FixedFloat exchange

  Are these "financial transactions"? Were they approved? Watch this site.

The case us US v. Bankman-Fried, et al., 22-cr-673 (Kaplan).

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2022 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com