Potential jurors in the upcoming criminal trial of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried could be asked their thoughts on crypto, effective altruism and attention-deficit disorder as his lawyers want to weed out those they consider unsuitable.
In court filings on Sep.11, Bankman-Fried’s lawyers and United States prosecutors separately filed their lists of proposed questions they wish to ask prospective jurors in the trial slated for Oct. 3.
Bankman-Fried wants to know if prospective jurors have invested in cryptocurrency, and if so, if they lost money or otherwise have a negative opinion on the industry.
In another question, the FTX co-founder is interested to know whether a juror would attribute a crypto firm’s failure to its owners, and if so, why.
Cryptocurrency-related questions proposed by Bankman-Fried’s lawyers to prospective jurors. Source: CourtListener
Bankman-Fried also wants prospective jurors’ thoughts on “effective altruism” — a charitable philosophical movement which Bankman-Fried built his reputation on.
Other questions concern if jurors think it’s “wrong” to donate large sums of money to political candidates and lobbyists to further their own interests along with detailing any personal or professional experience with an ADHD-medicated person.
As part of standard procedure, Bankman-Fried intends to ask if prospective jurors have read about him, have formed an opinion on his guilt or innocence or if they’ve expressed an opinion about Bankman-Fried, FTX or Alameda Research.
U.S. prosecutors wish to ask prospective jurors on their familiarity with FTX and its affiliates, whether they or a friend or family member have invested or worked in the crypto space and what role they believe the U.S. government should play in regulating the industry.
Prosecutors also want to ask whether jurors have ever lost money from an investment due to fraudulent conduct.
On Sept. 12, U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan denied Bankman-Fried’s request for temporary release ahead of his Oct. 3 trial, ruling that a poor internet connection inside the prison wasn’t a sufficient ground to grant his release.
Bankman-Fried pleaded not guilty to all seven fraud-related charges regarding his involvement in FTX’s collapse in November. He faces a separate criminal trial on additional charges in March next year.
After days of furore directed at Rishi Sunak for the election betting scandal, now a Labour candidate is under investigation by the Gambling Commission for his own betting activity – and is immediately suspended.
Is this an equaliser in one of the grubbiest electoral sagas of recent elections? Quite possibly not.
There is no doubting the utter dismay in Labour HQ at the revelation that they too have a candidate caught up in the betting scandal.
However, if this scenario is as presented, it is hard to see an allegation being mounted that he had insider intelligence on the race – unless it can be proved he was deliberately setting out to lose.
An under-pressure Gambling Commission will investigate every candidate’s name on the spreadsheet from gambling companies of those who placed bets – but it is unclear from available facts where this will go.
The Tory betting saga, however, is more complicated and now on its 13th day.
It was almost two weeks ago that Craig Williams – Rishi Sunak’s closest parliamentary aide and former Montgomeryshire MP – admitted he had placed a bet on the election date – a date he might have known before the public at large.
He denies he committed any offence, and remains under investigation.
Laura Saunders, standing for the Tories just south in Bristol North West, has also been suspended for putting a bet on the date when her partner worked in Conservative headquarters on the election.
For most of that time, Mr Sunak has been insisting he could not suspend either candidate because of the ongoing probe by the Gambling Commission.
Ministers, as well as opponents, weighed in.
And on Tuesday he reversed that decision under that pressure.
This means there are questions about the prime minister’s own judgement and unwillingness to act on top of questions about the behaviour of those closest to him.
Image: Craig Williams and Laura Saunders have both been suspended from the Tories. Pics: PA/Laura Saunders for Bristol North West
This story has had massive cut through with the public, topping the charts for any news story in the UK – according to YouGov’s AI news tracker – for the last four days.
There is dismay from the cabinet downwards.
Labour’s own problems have undermined their own ability to go on the attack. But it is not clear that voters will see the two issues on the same scale.
The full list of the candidates running for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich is:
Charlie Caiger, independent; Tony Gould, Reform UK; Mike Hallatt, independent; Brett Alistair Mickelburgh, Lib Dems; Dan Pratt, Greens; Patrick Spencer, Conservatives.
The full list of candidates for Bristol North West is:
Caroline Gooch, Lib Dems; Darren Jones, Labour; Scarlett O’Connor, Reform UK; Mary Page, Green Party; Ben Smith, SDP.
The full list of candidates for Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr is:
Jeremy Brignell-Thorp, Green Party; Oliver Lewis, Reform UK; Glyn Preston, Lib Dems; Elwyn Vaughan, Plaid Cymru; Steve Witherden, Labour.