Sam Bankman-Fried’s Trial May Not Be Until Next Year

While much of the world has eagerly waited for the start of Sam Bankman-Fried’s trial in October, the news has come on Wednesday afternoon that it may not begin until well into 2024.

Federal judge Louis Kaplan conveyed his surprising decision that he may grant defense lawyer’s request to give their client more time to review the evidence against him, Reuters reported. The judge might even roll up the legal proceedings into a combined trial with one set to take place in March next year, according to the report.

Sam Bankman-Fried’s “Trial of the Century” Bumped Back?

Many people could barely wait for the trial to begin in October, with Bankman-Fried facing an array of charges that could land him in jail for many years.

The former high-flying crypto entrepreneur has been in the headlines virtually every day in recent weeks, for everything from alleged witness intimidation to complaints about having to subsist on bread and water while in jail.

The so-called witness intimidation that landed Bankman-Fried in detention was not really a crime at all, he and his lawyers insist. That is merely how the other side in his highly contentious case predictably classifies it, they maintain.

Bankman-Fried shared his former girlfriend Caroline Ellison’s Google drive diary entries with a New York Times reporter. An action he and his counsel claim falls squarely under First Amendment guarantees of freedom of expression and of the press. It resulted in a sensational story, “Inside the Private Writings of Caroline Ellison, Star Witness in the FTX Case.”

On August 22, Bankman-Fried’s legal team made the case that his prison diet was so abysmal that it would get in the way of an effective defense. The attorneys also asked Judge Kaplan to allow Bankman-Fried weekday release, but the judge shot down this request.

Double Standards at Play?

The question of the extent of Bankman-Fried’s access to evidence, and the means by which he reviews it, has been a long-running point of contention. Last week, Judge Kaplan ruled that the defendant could have at least limited access to the evidence while in jail awaiting trial.

The interim order also gave Bankman-Fried more time to confer with his lawyers as they hone their defense strategy. No doubt they welcome this small reprieve, given the seriousness of the charges, from misleading investors to making illegal campaign contributions.

Despite the modest concessions, the ordeal of Bankman-Fried still contrasts jarringly with that of other high-profile defendants who stayed out of custody before and during their trials. The case of disgraced Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes comes to mind.

All of which suggests, to some observers, that an entrepreneur who made his name in cryptocurrency is still the bad guy in the eyes of an innovation-averse legal establishment.

This is a developing story…