Is Sam Bankman-Fried a Sufferer from a Double Standard? Prosecutors argue that Sam Bankman-Fried poses too great. The trial of the disgraced founder of FTX begins in October. On Wednesday. In a Manhattan courtroom stating that in the case of SBF, “no set of release conditions can assure the safety of the community.” Who, according to reports, only became aware of the request moments before the court proceedings began. In addition, the proposal stands in stark contrast to the mild treatment afforded to Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of Theranos.
Sam Bankman-Fried Dubbed a Flight Risk
Amid the frenzy of litigation that followed the collapse of the FTX in November 2022, the exchange’s creator has been residing in the state of California. However, his life is everything but easy. His legal staff is forced to be on the offensive at all times. During the past few days, accusations have been slung in both directions. In addition to the allegations that are associated with the collapse of FTX, Alameda Research has filed a lawsuit against asset manager K5 Global to recoup the 700 million dollars that SBF had donated. K5 Global asserts that their interactions constituted a perfectly legal form of commercial interaction.
During this time, the legal team representing SBF has voiced their displeasure with the decisions made by his successor as CEO of FTX, John Ray III. In a recent court filing, they accused Ray of having made “repeated ad hominem attacks on Mr. Bankman-Fried—which have very little to do with his role recovering assets for FTX creditors.” The phrase “repeated ad hominem attacks on Mr. Bankman-Fried” literally translates to “attacks against the person.” The fact that SBF leaked private Google Docs entries belonging to his ex-girlfriend, Caroline Ellison, to the New York Times has caused him to come under scrutiny.
Bankman-Fried Did Not Break the Law in Talking to the Press
Nevertheless, despite all of the negative aspects. It is not at all obvious what SBF constitutes. A threat to the neighborhood. The attorneys for SBF contend that their client was only complying. With the reporter’s request to hear his side of the story, he gave the reporter access to the journal entries. According to the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, what he did was perfectly within his rights. They maintain that they did not violate the protection order.
The conditions of SBF’s bail, are both applicable to them. The solicitors were very clear about this in the letter that they sent on 22 July to the judge in charge of the Southern District of New York, Lewis Kaplan. This is what the letter says:
“Defensive counsel independently verified that the documents were not a part of the discovery. As a result, did not implicate the protective order.” Defense lawyers called the prosecutors the following day. Revealed these findings. They also offered to submit copies of the documents to the Government’s filtration team so that the team could verify that the documents were not part of the discovery.
A Double Standard
Observers will inevitably speculate about whether or not the government. Some members of the media are unfairly punishing a crypto entrepreneur. Which was another high-profile bankruptcy case. According to several former workers of Theranos, they always lived in fear of getting. In trouble with the company’s founder and CEO Elizabeth Holmes. They were too afraid to tell anyone what they knew about the dishonest marketing practices of the company. It could be the end of their life and their jobs if they did something like that.
In John Carreyrou’s book titled Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies at a Silicon Valley Startup, the author describes how Holmes tampered with the intellectual property of scientists who worked for her to take credit for the work that they had done. However, this is not the only thing that Holmes did. The atmosphere at Theranos was extremely hazardous. Holmes had little tolerance for any kind of disloyalty, whether genuine or perceived. It got to be so awful that before quitting, one of the scientists made sure to make copies of all of the internal communications and documents.
There was no element of surprise here at all. Beginning in 2015, John Carreyrou of the Wall Street Journal wrote a series of articles about the bullying and harassment that was going on at the company. a significant amount of time before the beginning of the trial in September 2021. That’s not even the worst of it. Not even close. After that, he decided to take his own life. The atmosphere at the company, according to Gibbons’ widow, was the cause of her husband’s passing. She claims that Holmes has never shown any form of regret or sympathy towards her family in any way.
Despite her well-known role in intimidating witnesses, Holmes was able to have a comfortable life in which she had complete autonomy. It was not until May 2023, over two years after her trial had begun that she was allowed to glimpse the interior of a cell. A striking contrast to the steps that the prosecution in the FTX case is now publicly advocating as being appropriate. despite the absence of any evidence that can be considered credible suggesting that SBF’s interactions with reporters constitute a violation of any law or the terms of his release. It would appear that a crypto entrepreneur poses a much greater threat than a former chief executive officer, the latter of whom was responsible for the suicide of a prospective informant.