Cocoa bean trader who lost $100,000 to FTX was first witness in Sam Bankman-Fried trial
Sam Bankman-Fried Trial appears at Federal Court in New York on Oct. 4th, 2023.
Artist: Claudia Johnson
Marc-Antoine Julliard typically trades cocoa beans. But in the spring of 2021, the London-based commodities broker decided to diversify into cryptocurrency trading. His platform of choice was FTX.
Two years later, Julliard stood as the prosecution’s first witness in the criminal fraud trial against FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, who’s accused of misusing billions of dollars in client money.
In testimony that lasted around 50 minutes on Wednesday, Julliard recounted his experience with FTX, including the “extremely anxious” feeling he had the day he unsuccessfully attempted to withdraw part of the $100,000 worth of crypto and cash he had stored on the site. He and thousands of other FTX customers were practically wiped out when the exchange went belly up late last year.
Like many others, Julliard said he he was under the impression that there were “strong financials behind the company.”
Julliard is the poster child for the case the prosecution laid out in its opening statement as it tries to prove to a jury that clients were led to believe the money they stored with FTX was safe. Prospective customers, Julliard said, were drawn in through savvy marketing, with no reason to believe that FTX would be repurposing their crypto funds.
In a trial that’s set to last six weeks, Bankman-Fried, a man once revered as the “white knight” of crypto, faces seven federal charges, including wire fraud, securities fraud and money laundering, that could put him in prison for the rest of his life.
A jury was seated shortly after 11:30 a.m. (though four of the 12 jurors were already looking to be dismissed). Opening statements began about an hour later. Julliard took the stand just before 2 p.m. to a packed courthouse in Manhattan.
As the lead witness, Julliard helped lay out the government’s narrative. Much of his decision to buy into FTX had to do with the celebrities and venture funds attached to the brand. He referenced an ad with supermodel Gisele Bündchen and Formula 1 marketing. He also pointed to prolific media coverage, which bolstered his trust in the company.
Julliard wasn’t an aggressive crypto trader. He said he never participated in margin trading, or borrowing money to make purchases, nor did he engage in a lending program offered by the company that allowed users to earn interest on idle crypto.
Sam Bankman-Fried sits with his defense team during his fraud trial over the collapse of FTX, the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange, at Federal Court in New York City, U.S., October 4, 2023 in this courtroom sketch.
Jane Rosenberg | Reuters
Defense wants customers to shoulder blame
The defense is trying to make clients accountable for what it says were their choices to buy and trade crypto.
“Sam didn’t defraud anyone,” said Mark Cohen, Bankman-Fried’s attorney, in his opening statement. Cohen called it a “hindsight case” brought by the government, and said that just because people lost money, doesn’t mean the 31-year-old Bankman-Fried committed fraud.
Bankman-Fried donned a fresh suit with a purple tie and a clean haircut — a much different look than the beach shorts, sandals and wild curls that helped define his image during crypto’s heyday. The entrepreneur, who Cohen described as a “math nerd that didn’t drink or party,” diligently took notes on his air-gapped laptop as he conversed with both of his attorneys and, during breaks, sometimes stood while emphatically motioning with his hands as he spoke to his counsel.
Throughout both sides’ opening statements, Bankman-Fried kept his eyes trained on the jury box. His head was turned 90 degrees to his right to watch those who will ultimately decide his fate. Bankman-Fried was joined in court by his parents, who are both being sued by FTX’s new management for having allegedly “exploited their access and influence within the FTX enterprise to enrich themselves…by millions of dollars.”
Cohen is projecting Bankman-Fried as a startup founder and equated running FTX and Alameda Research, his sister hedge fund, to “building a plane while flying on it.” He told the jury that there was no risk management in place. Specifically, he said the firm didn’t have a chief risk officer.
Far from the “cartoon of a villain” that the government presented, Cohen gave different explanations for his client’s supposedly illegal actions. One example dealt with the secret backdoor baked into FTX’s code that prosecutors say gave Alameda a way to borrow much needed capital.
Cohen said there was nothing secretive about this backchannel in the code base and said the special access to FTX was there because Alameda was initially set up as a market maker for the crypto exchange, which needed the liquidity, especially in its early days.
Cohen reminded the jury that the three insiders who will take the stand against Bankman-Fried have all signed cooperation agreements with the government.
A $10 billion fraud
The prosecution’s opening statement was delivered by Assistant U.S. Attorney Thane Rehn. Over the course of about a half hour, Rehn drove home the point that everyday investors were the ones who fell victim to FTX’s scheme. By the summer of 2022, he said, more than $10 billion had been stolen from thousands of FTX customers who had trusted custody of their crypto and cash to the platform.
Rehn said the evidence would show jurors how Bankman-Fried lied to FTX users, investors and lenders, and how he spent a good amount of the money he stole for his own good. Rehn referenced campaign contributions, for example, as one way that Bankman-Fried looked to curry favor on Capitol Hill.
Rehn called Alameda a “second, smaller and more secretive company” founded and controlled by Bankman-Fried that was integral to the defendant’s alleged scheme.
The government also teed up its star witness, ex-girlfriend and Alameda’s ex-CEO, Caroline Ellison. She pleaded guilty in December to multiple charges and has been cooperating with the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan for months.
Rehn plans to show that Bankman-Fried installed his girlfriend at the top of his hedge fund, though he remained the one calling the shots behind the scenes.
Allan Joseph Bankman, father of FTX Co-Founder Sam Bankman-Fried, and Barbara Fried, mother of FTX Co-Founder Sam Bankman-Fried, arrive at court in New York, US, on Wednesday, Oct. 4, 2023.
Stephanie Keith | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Noticeably absent was the mention of Ellison’s co-CEO Sam Trabucco, who was a classmate of Bankman-Fried at MIT. Trabucco left FTX in Aug. 2022, and has stayed relatively under the radar.
Also central to the government’s case is the alleged coverup to hide Bankman-Fried’s crimes. Those tactics include backdating contracts and using encrypted messaging apps set to auto-delete to avoid a paper trail.
“This man stole billions of dollars from thousands of people,” Rein said, as he closed his statement.
The prosecution’s second witness was Adam Yedidia, who met Bankman-Fried in college at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The pair remained good friends.
Yedida detailed his experience working first as a trader at Alameda for two months in 2017, and later as a software engineer for FTX beginning in January 2021. He said he resigned from FTX the day before the exchange filed for bankruptcy after a fellow developer told him that Alameda had used FTX customer deposits to pay back creditors.
Speaking quickly and deliberately with an air of practiced nonchalance, Yedida testified that he hadn’t talked to Bankman-Fried or seen him in person since Nov. 2022.
When asked why he was appearing under an immunity order, Yedida said he was concerned that as an FTX developer, he “may have unwittingly written code that contributed to a crime.”
Prosecutors got through a half hour of testimony before breaking for the day. The government will continue its questioning of Yedida at 9:30 A.M. on Thursday.
FTX co-founder Gary Wang will also be taking the stand this week for the government.
Over the last few days, Elon Musk has been making several statements claiming that autonomous driving systems that use lidar and radar sensors are more dangerous than Tesla’s camera-only computer vision approach because the system gets confused when interpreting data from different sensors.
It’s not only false, Musk told me directly that he agreed that radar and vision could be safer than just vision, right after he had Tesla remove the radars from its vehicles.
Tesla has taken a controversial approach, using only cameras as sensors for driving inputs in its self-driving technology. In contrast, most other companies use cameras in conjunction with radar and lidar sensors.
When Tesla first announced that all its cars produced onward have the hardware capable of “full self-driving” up to level 5 autonomous capacity in 2016, it included a front-facing radar in its self-driving hardware suite.
However, in 2021, after not having achieved anything more than a level 2 driver assist (ADAS) system with its self-driving effort, Elon Musk announced a move that he called “Tesla Vision”, which consists of moving Tesla’s self-driving effort only to use inputs from cameras.
Here’s what I wrote in 2021 about Musk sharing his plan for Tesla to only use cameras and neural nets:
CEO Elon Musk has been hyping the vision-only update as “mind-blowing.” He insists that it will lead to a true level 5 autonomous driving system by the end of the year, but he has gotten that timeline wrong before.
By May 2021, Tesla had begun removing the radar sensor from its lineup, starting with the Model 3 and Model Y, and later the Model S and Model X in 2022.
Tesla engineers reportedly attempted to convince Musk to retain the use of radar, but the CEO overruled them.
We are now in 2025, and unlike what Musk claimed, Tesla has yet to deliver on its self-driving promises, but the CEO is doubling down on his vision-only approach.
The controversial billionaire is making headlines this week for a series of new statements attacking Tesla’s self-driving rivals and their use of radar and lidar sensors.
Earlier this week, Musk took a jab at Waymo and claimed that “lidar and radar reduce safety”:
Lidar and radar reduce safety due to sensor contention. If lidars/radars disagree with cameras, which one wins? This sensor ambiguity causes increased, not decreased, risk. That’s why Waymos can’t drive on highways.We turned off radars in Teslas to increase safety. Cameras ftw.
The assertion that “Waymos can’t drive on highways” is simply false. Waymo has been conducting fully driverless employee testing on freeways in Phoenix, San Francisco, and Los Angeles for years, and it is expected to make this technology available to rider-only rides soon.
Tesla is in a similar situation with its Robotaxi: they don’t drive on freeways without an employee supervisor.
Musk later added:
LiDAR also does not work well in snow, rain or dust due to reflection scatter. That’s why Waymos stop working in any heavy precipitation. As I have said many times, there is a role for LiDAR in some circumstances and I personally oversaw the development of LiDAR for the SpaceX Dragon docking with Space Station. I am well aware of its strengths and weaknesses.
It’s not true that Waymos can’t work in “any heavy precipitation.”
Here’s a video of a Waymo vehicle driving by itself in heavy rain:
In comparison, Tesla’s own Robotaxi terms of service mention that it “may be limited or unavailable in inclement weather.”
Last month, Tesla Robotaxi riders had their rides cut short, and they were told it was due to the rain.
There’s plenty of evidence that Musk is wrong and misleading with these statements, but furthermore, he himself admitted that radar sensors can make Tesla’s vision system safer.
‘Vision with high-res radar would be better than pure vision’
In May 2021, as Tesla began removing radar sensors from its vehicle lineup and transitioning to a vision-only approach, I was direct messaging (DMing) Musk to learn more about the surprising move.
In the conversation, he was already making the claim that sensor contention is lowering safety as he did this week in new comments attacking Waymo.
He wrote at the time:
The probability of safety will be higher with pure vision than vision+radar, not lower. Vision has become so good that radar actually reduces signal/noise.
However, what was more interesting is what he said shortly after claiming that:
Musk admitted that “vision with high-resolution radar would be better than pure vision”. However, he claimed that such a radar didn’t exist.
In the same conversation, I pointed Musk to existing high-definition millimeter wave radars, but he didn’t respond.
It was still early for that technology in 2021, but high-definition millimeter wave radars are now commonly used by companies developing autonomous driving technologies, including Waymo.
Waymo uses six high-definition radars in its system:
In short, Musk was already concerned about sensor contention in 2021, but he admitted that the problem would be worth solving with higher-definition radars, which already existed then and are becoming more common now.
Yet, he criticizes companies using radar and lidar, which work similarly to high-resolution radars but on different wavelengths, for even attempting sensor fusion.
It’s not impossible because Tesla can’t do it
Part of the problem here appears to be that Musk thinks something doesn’t work because Tesla can’t make it work, and he doesn’t want to admit that others are solving the sensor fusion problem.
Tesla simply couldn’t solve sensor fusion, so it focused on achieving autonomy solely through camera vision. However, those who continued to work on the issue have made significant progress and are now reaping the rewards.
Waymo and Baidu, both of which have level 4 autonomous driving systems currently commercially operating without supervision, unlike Tesla, have heavily invested in sensor fusion.
Amir Husain, an AI entrepreneur who sits on the Boards of Advisors for IBM Watson and the Department of Computer Science at UT Austin, points to advancements in the use of Kalman filters and Bayesian techniques to solve sensor noise covariance.
He commented on Musk’s statement regarding the use of radar and lidar sensors:
The issue isn’t a binary disagreement between two sensors. It generates a better estimate than any individual sensor can produce on its own. They all have a margin of error. Fusion helps reduce this.
If Musk’s argument held, why would the human brain use eyes, ears, and touch to estimate object location? Why would aircraft combine radar, IRST, and other passive sensors to estimate object location? This is a fundamental misunderstanding of information theory. Every channel has noise. But redundancy reduces uncertainty.
Musk’s main argument to focus on cameras and neural nets has been that the roads are designed for humans to drive and humans drive using their eyes and brain, which are the hardware and software equivalent of cameras (eyes) and neural nets (brain).
Now, most other companies developing autonomous driving technologies are also focusing on this, but to surpass humans and achieve greater levels of safety through precision and redundancy, they are also adding radar and lidar sensors to their systems.
Electrek’s Take
Musk painted Tesla into a corner with its vision-only approach, and now he is trying to mislead people into thinking that it is the only one that can work, when there’s no substantial evidence to support this claim.
Now, let me be clear, Musk is partly correct. When poorly fused, multi-sensor data introduces noise, making it more challenging to operate an autonomous driving system.
However, who said that this is an unsolvable problem? Others appear to be solving it, and we are seeing the results in Waymo’s and Baidu’s commercially available rider-only taxi services.
If you can take advantage of radar’s ability to detect distance and speed as well as work through rain, fog, dust, and snow, why wouldn’t you use it?
As he admitted in the DMs with me in 2021, Musk is aware of this – hence why he acknowledged that high-resolution radar combined with vision would be safer than vision alone.
The problem is that Tesla hasn’t focused on improving sensor fusion and radar integration in the last 4 years because it has been all-in on vision.
Now, Tesla could potentially still solve self-driving with its vision system, but there’s no evidence that it is close to happening or any safer than other systems, such as Waymo’s, which use radar and lidar sensors.
In fact, Tesla is still only operating an autonomous driving system under the supervision of in-car employees with a few dozen cars, while Waymo has been doing rider-only rides for years and operates over 1,500 autonomous vehicles in the US.
Just like with his “Robotaxi” with supervisors, Musk is trying to create the illusion that Tesla is not only leading in autonomy, but it is the only one that can solve it.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Trump’s Interior Department halted construction on 704 megawatt (MW) Revolution Wind, the US’s first multi-state offshore wind project that’s already 80% complete. Grid operator ISO New England says the decision is a threat to the grid.
ISO New England released a statement responding to the stop-work order, warning that “delaying the project will increase risks to reliability.”:
As demand for electricity grows, New England must maintain and add to its energy infrastructure. Unpredictable risks and threats to resources – regardless of technology – that have made significant capital investments, secured necessary permits, and are close to completion will stifle future investments, increase costs to consumers, and undermine the power grid’s reliability and the region’s economy now and in the future.
Revolution Wind, a joint development between Ørsted and BlackRock’s Global Infrastructure Partners, is a 65-turbine project capable of powering around 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut once it’s complete. It was expected to come online next year. The project has created more than 1,200 jobs.
On August 22, the director of Bureau of Ocean Energy Management sent a vague letter to Ørsted commanding it to halt all activities on the fully permitted Revolution Wind, citing “national security interests,” yet providing no details.
BOEM’s Record of Decision for Revolution Wind, reported in 2023 in Section 4.6, page 185, states that the national security effects of the project would be “negligible and avoidable.”
This latest move echoes Trump’s cancellation in April of New York’s $5 billion Empire Wind 1 project, which was already under construction off New York’s coast. No viable reasons were given for that stop-work order either, and the cancellation was reversed in May.
Kit Kennedy, managing director for power at Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), released the following statement in response to the Revolution Wind order:
The Trump administration’s war on the electricity needed to power the grid continues on all fronts. Halting Revolution Wind is a devastating attack on workers, on electricity customers, and on the investment climate in the US.
New England homeowners will feel this when they tear open their electricity bills and look at the surging costs of keeping the lights on.
This administration has it exactly backwards. It’s trying to prop up clunky, polluting coal plants while doing all it can to halt the fastest growing energy sources of the future – solar and wind power.
It makes no sense to say we have an energy emergency and then make decisions like this. Unfortunately, every American is paying the price for these misguided actions.
Read more: Trump reversal revives Empire Wind, NY’s offshore energy giant
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Tesla is teasing a new product release on Friday, August 29th, coming to Europe and the Middle East. It’s likely going to be the Model Y Performance.
On X today, Tesla has teased an upcoming product release coming this friday.
The post is cryptic. It only mentions ‘spoiler alert’ and the date August 29 with what looks like a close up of a vehicle with what appears to be a spoil – hence the “spoiler alert” reference:
There are main suspect is the Model Y Performance due to the spoiler reference.
Since the Model Y refresh in January, Tesla stopped selling the Model Y Performance. It is due to launch the top performance version under the new design.
When Tesla released the Model 3 refresh in 2024, it took about 4 months for Tesla to launch the new performance version.
Electrek’s Take
The only thing that I find strange with this likely being the Model Y Performance is the fact that they tweeted this from the Europe and Middle East account.
It would be strange for the Model Y Performance to launch there first, but who knows. Maybe Tesla started production at Gigafactory Berlin first.
I don’t think this will have a major impact on Tesla’s business. The Model Y Performance is the least popular version of the best-selling Model Y.
We don’t have the full mix of sales, but I wouldn’t be suprised if it represents less than 10% of Tesla’s Model Y deliveries.
The Model 3 Performance is probably a more popular option within the Model 3 lineup as it is a lot more fun to drive.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024