The lawyers representing the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a new court document late on Aug. 29 arguing that Sam Bankman-Fried should provide additional disclosures to his planned defense.
The document called the current proposed argument, which claims his lawyers approved of fraud allegations while he was still at FTX, “irrelevant.” The filing requests that the court order the defendant to procure “additional notice” and “pretrial discovery.”
“If the defendant does not provide additional disclosures, the court should preclude irrelevant, confusing, and prejudicial questioning, evidence, and arguments about the involvement of attorneys.”
Previously, the lawyers representing SBF argued that the legal team leading FTX led him to act “in good faith” and that “reliance on counsel is relevant to the question of intent.”
The former legal team behind FTX was hit with a lawsuit on Aug. 7 alleging that it had set up “shadowy entities” which set the executives up to implement “creative but illegal strategies” to perpetuate fraud.
Attorney Damian Williams, who penned the recent letter to the court argued that Bankman-Fried needs to specify the legal advice he was given or else rethink his defense.
The DOJ said the defendant has not provided an “exhaustive” list of the topics there is claimed to be attorney involvement. Additionally, SBF has yet to identify “the contours of the attorney involvement” nor the bases and details of the defense. He also noted the lack of documents in support of, impeaching or undermining his defense.
The morning after the filing, on Aug. 30, SBF’s lawyer Mark Cohen responded to the DOJ’s filing countering that “sufficient” disclosures had already been made regarding the defense and commented on his client’s conditions in jail violating the U.S. Constitution.
“At the present time, the defense is unable to adequately prepare for trial and prepare the defense, which is a violation of Mr. Bankman-Fried’s Sixth Amendment rights.”
He also called the available internet connection “woefully inadequate.” On Aug. 23 the court ruled that SBF could meet with his lawyers outside of jail with a notice of 48 hours.
Lucy Powell has accused Bridget Phillipson’s team of “throwing mud” and briefing against her in the Labour deputy leadership race in a special episode of Sky’s Electoral Dysfunction podcast.
With just days to go until the race is decided, Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby spoke to the two leadership rivals about allegations of leaks, questions of party unity and their political vision.
Ms Powell told Electoral Dysfunction that through the course of the contest, she had “never leaked or briefed”.
But she said of negative stories about her in the media: “I think some of these things have also come from my opponent’s team as well. And I think they need calling out.
“We are two strong women standing in this contest. We’ve both got different things to bring to the job. I’m not going to get into the business of smearing and briefing against Bridget.
“Having us airing our dirty washing, throwing mud – both in this campaign or indeed after this if I get elected as deputy leader – that is not the game that I’m in.”
Ms Powell was responding to a “Labour source” who told the New Statesman last week:“Lucy was sacked from cabinet because she couldn’t be trusted not to brief or leak.”
Ms Powell said she had spoken directly to Ms Phillipson about allegations of briefings “a little bit”.
Image: Bridget Phillipson (l) and Lucy Powell (r) spoke to Sky News’ Beth Rigby in a special Electoral Dysfunction double-header. Pics: Reuters
Phillipson denies leaks
But asked separately if her team had briefed against Ms Powell, Ms Phillipson told Rigby: “Not to my knowledge.”
And Ms Phillipson said she had not spoken “directly” to her opponent about the claims of negative briefings, despite Ms Powell saying the pair had talked about it.
“I don’t know if there’s been any discussion between the teams,” she added.
On the race itself, the education secretary said it would be “destabilising” if Ms Powell is elected, as she is no longer in the cabinet.
“I think there is a risk that comes of airing too much disagreement in public at a time when we need to focus on taking the fight to our opponents.
“I know Lucy would reject that, but I think that is for me a key choice that members are facing.”
She added: “It’s about the principle of having that rule outside of government that risks being the problem. I think I’ll be able to get more done in government.”
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
But Ms Powell, who was recently sacked by Sir Keir Starmer as leader of the Commons, said she could “provide a stronger, more independent voice”.
“The party is withering on the vine at the same time, and people have got big jobs in government to do.
“Politics is moving really, really fast. Government is very, very slow. And I think having a full-time political deputy leader right now is the political injection we need.”
The result of the contest will be announced on Saturday 25 October.
The deputy leader has the potential to be a powerful and influential figure as the link between members and the parliamentary Labour Party, and will have a key role in election campaigns. They can’t be sacked by Sir Keir as they have their own mandate.
The contest was triggered by the resignation of Angela Rayner following a row over her tax affairs. She was also the deputy prime minister but this position was filled by David Lammy in a wider cabinet reshuffle.