Federal authorities have accused Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of FTX, of leaking Caroline Ellison’s private communication to the New York Times. He has to show up for a hearing the next week, per a court order.According to reports, US District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan instructed the parties to get ready to reevaluate Bankman-Fried’s bond requirements.
Bankman-Fried was accused of perjury by federal officials when it was claimed that he had made Ellison’s private notes public. In an email sent to US District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan on Thursday, Bankman-Fried, according to attorneys, offered the New York Times access to Ellison’s writings in an effort to “interfere with a fair trial by an impartial jury.” The New York Times made public private journal entries that Caroline Ellison had written in Google Docs in an article titled “Inside the Private Writings of Caroline Ellison, star witness in the FTX Case,” which was released on Thursday.
While she was CEO of FTX’s bitcoin hedge fund Alameda Research, they purportedly asserted that she was “unhappy and overwhelmed” in terms of her emotional health. She allegedly voiced public worries about both the efficiency of the company’s operations and her capacity for judgment. In December, Ellison entered a plea of guilty to several counts of conspiracy and fraud for her involvement in the plot that brought down FTX.
It is expected that Bankman-Fried would testify in the prosecution’s case against her, who has entered a not guilty plea to eight federal counts of conspiracy and fraud. The prosecution asserted in their letter to Kaplan that they had been informed earlier in the week of the article’s upcoming release.
Additionally, they asserted that Bankman-Fried’s attorneys had admitted that their client had spoken with the newspaper and provided them with papers that weren’t included in the discovery materials. US Attorney Damian Williams outlined the prosecution’s case against Bankman-Fried as follows: “By selectively sharing certain private documents with the New York Times, the defendant is attempting to discredit a witness, cast Ellison in a poor light, and advance his defense through the press and outside of the constraints of the courtroom and rules of evidence: that Ellison was a jilted lover who perpetrated these crimes alone.”
For the defendant to raise concerns about Ellison’s reliability before the case went to trial, Ellison claimed, “is ludicrous and improper, especially in light of information that the defense has not established is admissible at trial, much less presented to the government. The government asserts that the weight of the evidence will render this defense ineffective.
Because of their concern that Bankman-Fried would sway the jury and intimidate witnesses, the prosecution is trying to restrict his ability to make public statements.”The effect, if not the intent, of the defendant’s conduct is not only to harass Ellison, but also to deter other potential trial witnesses from testifying,” Williams alleged. The jury pool is likewise tarnished by this behavior. The Bankman-Fried employee refrained from commenting. A spokeswoman for Ellison did not immediately respond to questions given to The New York Times.