Introduction
Disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried has launched a last-ditch legal maneuver, filing for a new trial days after dismissing his appellate lawyer and opting to represent himself. The convicted fraudster, currently serving a 25-year sentence, claims to have uncovered new evidence that could potentially overturn his conviction on seven federal fraud and conspiracy charges. This dramatic move follows his recent, unsuccessful attempts to align himself politically with former President Donald Trump and public claims of being a victim of targeted “lawfare.”
Key Points
- Bankman-Fried filed the new trial request via his mother, Stanford Law ethics professor Barbara Fried, after firing his appellate lawyer and choosing to represent himself.
- He is invoking Rule 33, which permits defendants to seek a new trial within three years if they claim to have discovered new evidence; otherwise, such requests must be made within 14 days of conviction.
- Bankman-Fried has recently used social media to allege he is a target of 'lawfare' by the Biden administration and attempted to align himself with Donald Trump, who has ruled out pardoning him.
A Formal Motion for a Retrial
Sam Bankman-Fried formally requested a new trial in a Manhattan court on Tuesday, invoking Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. This specific rule allows a defendant to petition for a new trial within three years of a guilty verdict if they claim to possess newly discovered evidence. The filing, first reported by Inner City Press, was submitted on Bankman-Fried’s behalf by his mother, Stanford Law School ethics professor Barbara Fried. This action came just days after the former crypto mogul fired his appellate lawyer, Jason Driscoll, and decided to proceed pro se, representing himself in the ongoing legal battle.
The legal standard for such a motion is high. Requests for a new trial based on any grounds other than newly discovered evidence must be filed within a strict 14-day window following conviction. Bankman-Fried’s jury verdict was delivered over two years ago, making Rule 33 his only viable procedural path. The nature of the alleged “new evidence” remains entirely unclear from the public filing, leaving legal observers to speculate on what, if anything, could substantively challenge the overwhelming case presented by federal prosecutors during his 2023 trial.
The Weight of the Conviction and a Failed Appeal
The motion represents the latest chapter in the dramatic fall of Sam Bankman-Fried, once hailed as a crypto wunderkind. He was found guilty on all seven counts of fraud and conspiracy related to the catastrophic implosion of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange. At its peak, FTX was valued at $32 billion before its collapse in 2022, an event that revealed a staggering $10 billion shortfall in customer funds, which prosecutors proved were misappropriated for lavish investments, political donations, and personal enrichment.
This new trial request follows Bankman-Fried’s 2024 appeal of his conviction, which was largely seen as a long shot. In that appeal, he argued he was “presumed guilty” by all parties involved, including the media, prosecutors, the presiding judge, and even the FTX debtor estate handling the bankruptcy. The appeal did not succeed in overturning the 25-year sentence, prompting this latest, more desperate legal strategy centered on the claim of undiscovered evidence.
Political Posturing and a Pardon Denied
Parallel to his legal filings, Bankman-Fried has engaged in a public relations campaign, primarily on the social media platform X, where he posts through a proxy. His recent communications have focused on alleging he is a victim of “lawfare”—a term implying the weaponization of legal systems—directed at the cryptocurrency industry by the Biden administration. In a notable strategic shift, he has also attempted to align himself with former President Donald Trump since Trump’s re-election, claiming both men were targeted with “bogus charges” by political enemies.
This political gambit appears to be a calculated, albeit unsuccessful, effort to seek clemency. However, it mirrors a strategy revealed during his trial, where prosecutors entered into evidence a document in which Bankman-Fried considered “coming out as a Republican” as a tactic to deflect culpability. The effort has borne no fruit. Trump explicitly told The New York Times last month that he has no intention of pardoning Sam Bankman-Fried, effectively closing that potential avenue of escape and leaving the legal system as his sole remaining hope.
📎 Related coverage from: decrypt.co
