Table of Contents
Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried finally took the stand in his criminal fraud trial this week, as his defense team looked to pose questions that aimed to justify his actions in running FTX.
Bankman-Fried taking the stand also meant that prosecutor Danielle Sassoon also got a chance to cross-examine Bankman-Fried.
Bankman-Fried Believed Taking Customer Funds Was Legal
Mark Cohen, the lead defense lawyer, sought to draw focus on Bankman-Fried’s simultaneous leadership of FTX and his proprietary trading firm, Alameda Research. When asked by Cohen about why he had the signing authority for both of the companies in question, Bankman-Fried replied that he was the CEO of both firms at the time. He also added that FTX did not have a bank account.
Cohen further questioned his client regarding the mingling of FTX customer deposits and Alameda funds, asking Bankman-Fried if he thought this was legal. To this, Bankman-Fried stated that he did think taking FTX customer funds through Alameda Research was legal.
“JUST IN: Sam Bankman-Fried says he believed it was legal to take FTX customer funds through Alameda Research.”
Bankman-Fried Did Not Intentionally Commit Fraud
Cohen asserted in his opening arguments that while Bankman-Fried made several mistakes while running FTX and Alameda Research, he did not intentionally commit fraud during that time. According to the defense, the young founder only wanted to scale operations at the now-bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange rapidly. They further argued that mistakes and oversights were inevitable in such a chaotic startup environment.
Alameda Research was heavily reliant on FTX customer funds to make trades and offer loans. This co-dependency had a significant role to play in the $32 billion worth FTX’s quick collapse when withdrawals peaked last November. During the testimony, the judge asked Bankman-Fried if he had read FTX’s terms of service in full. To this, he admitted that he had skimmed over certain parts while reading other parts more thoroughly.