The Bankman-Fried defense team made an attempt to route the proceeding towards English Law. The move portrays attempts to impact Bankman-Fried’s fraud charges. Sam Bankman Fried’s (SBF’s) defense team is attempting again to ensure the jury overseeing the trial considers the English law’s role in governing FTX’s terms of service.
They hope it might result in a ‘not guilty’ judgment on some of the charges Bankman-Fried faces. A filing incorporating a proposed jury instruction stated that for embezzlement to have taken place, based on the government’s theory, there should have been a fiduciary relationship, trust, or a parallel link between the firm and its clients.
Sam Bankman Fried Defense Team Seeks to Introduce English Law in Ongoing Criminal Charges
The suggested jury instruction would communicate to the 12 persons determining SBF’s destiny that ‘the Terms of Service governed FTX’s association with its clients.’ In turn, ‘English law governs the terms.’
An extra group of filings offers example cases from the United Kingdom. Further, representations made following a client’s acceptance of the Terms of Service do not develop a similar fiduciary or trust relationship.
Judge Lewis Kaplan stated that the simple idea concerning an individual subjectively expecting, believing, or understanding a faith, fiduciary relationship, or the existence of a similar relationship fails to establish this kind of relationship.
Principles of English Law
Earlier this month, Mark Cohen, the defense attorney, compelled ex-FTX General Counsel to read a section of the terms of service. It stated that terms and disputes must be overseen and interpreted based on English law.
As of 10.30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), the Department of Justice (DOJ) has yet to comment on the latest filing. Still, an earlier filing that opposed one of SBF’s suggested expert witnesses revealed that prosecutors’ belief in firmly concentrating on the Terms of Service provision that portrays the relationship between FTX and its customers. Citing the English law it was reported the Term of Service was misinterpreted in the SBF case.
An August 28 filing by the Department of Justice showed it is lawfully wrong to suggest to the jury that it should just focus on the terms of service instead of the total range of the respondent’s falsifications and deceptive behavior.
The filing showed that besides the terms, SBF’s earlier statements and the ‘common understanding of cryptocurrency clients’ are appropriate. During his trial, prosecutors have requested FTX clients and SBF to deliberate on the exchange’s marketing and its implications for clients.
Judge Kaplan has revealed to the parties his intention to conduct a jury charge conference after rest, and this might take place very soon. The meeting is meant to allow the parties to argue over their different competing jury instruction proposals.
Last week, SBF took the stand and is presently being questioned. The Department of Justice intends to conclude on Tuesday morning.
SureTradeGroup.com is not responsible for the content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or any other content posted on the site. Some of the content on this site is paid content that is not written or posted by our writers or editors and the opinions expressed do not reflect the opinions of this website. Any disagreement you may have with brands or companies mentioned in articles will need to be taken care of directly with those specific brands and companies. The responsibility of anyone who may click links in our articles and ultimately sign up for that product or service is their own. Forex, Stocks, Cryptocurrencies, NFTs and Dogital Tokens are all a high-risk asset, investing in them can lead to losses. Readers should do their own research before taking any action.