- SBF’s attorneys have circled back to the “advice-of-counsel” argument.
- The attorneys filed a motion in preparation for Ellison’s cross-examination.
- The defense wants to pin the FTX’s collapse blame on company lawyers.
Fallen crypto’s golden boy Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) seems convinced that pinning the FTX’s collapse blame on other people would make him a saint in the multiple counts of fraud allegations.
In a move seen to demonstrate how lawyers influenced FTX’s investment decisions, an argument that Judge Lewis Kaplan has reservations for, SBF’s legal team has filed a motion to cross-examine Caroline Ellison on the extent to which she relied on the “advice-of-counsel” to make decisions while at the helm of Alameda Research.
Did FTX and Alameda Lawyers Participate in Setting Policies?
Shortly after the former Alameda CEO testified on October 10, the defense team filed a motion seeking Judge Kaplan’s permission to elicit evidence concerning the involvement of Attorneys in SBF’s alleged crimes under an October 1 court order that directed advance notification for such arguments.
Sponsored
The attorneys stated the prosecution seeks to elicit from Ellison that SBF directed her to set auto-deletion on her specific Signal and Slack messaging accounts.
Hinging on this ground, the defense has asked the court to allow its team to cross-examine Ellison on the involvement of counsel in creating, reviewing, or approving auto-deletion policies at Alameda Research.
Specifically, if the government raises the issue of auto-deletion, the defense would want Ellison to clarify the names of the attorneys present during the consideration, reviewing, and approval of the policy, the extent of their involvement, and whether they prepared specific policies.
Sponsored
According to the attorneys, answers to the questions would help demonstrate Bankman-Fried innocence.
Letting SBF Off the Hook
The defense team argues that counsel’s involvement in enacting auto-deletion policies at Alameda directly relates to “Bankman-Fried’s good faith and lack of criminal intent” while running the now-bankrupt FTX exchange and its affiliated companies.
Per the attorneys, whether Ellison comprehended that the auto-deletion policies were set under the guidance of lawyers would be relevant to rebut the government’s inference that the policies were instituted to conceal wrongdoings.
Stay updated on how SBF’s first week of trial went down:
Unpacking the SBF Trial, Highlights from the First Week
Read SBF’s reflections and self-justifications on the FTX collapse:
SBF’s Unposted Twitter Thread Leaks: I’m “Broke” and “Hated”
