Here are the emails, texts and photos that could put Sam Bankman-Fried in prison for life
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Over the past month, lawyers in the criminal trial of Sam Bankman-Fried have brought close to 20 witnesses to the stand and presented hundreds of exhibits to the 12 jurors who will decide the fate of the boy once deemed the king of crypto.
The jury, which began deliberations on Thursday afternoon, has a mountain of evidence to consider in determining whether the 31-year-old founder of FTX is guilty of seven criminal counts, which include wire fraud, securities fraud and money laundering. Bankman-Fried, who has pleaded not guilty to all charges, faces more than 100 years in prison if convicted.
While prosecutors were able to present the jury with testimony from members of the defendant’s inner circle, Bankman-Fried’s case rests largely on his own appearance on the witness stand.
“From beginning to end, Sam Bankman-Fried’s team failed to come up with a real game changer,” said Renato Mariotti, a former prosecutor in the U.S. Justice Department’s Securities and Commodities Fraud Section and now a trial partner in Chicago with Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner. “His fraud was brazen and difficult to explain away, and he lacked the discipline to keep his mouth shut even after it was apparent that he was under criminal investigation.”
In addition to oral testimony, the government brought in other evidence to try and prove its case and to paint a picture of an executive who got too much, too fast, and spent well in excess of his means. These exhibits include encrypted text messages, emails, promissory notes, Google docs, spreadsheets, leaked videos and photos displaying Bankman-Fried’s lavish lifestyle, including of his $35 million condo in the Bahamas.
Lawyers for the U.S. Attorney’s office entered into evidence a series of photos featuring the $35 million penthouse where Sam Bankman-Fried and his fellow co-workers resided.
Source: SDNY
$1.1 billion in promissory notes
For weeks, prosecutors have shown the jury how billions of dollars in FTX customer money went to political donations, venture investments and luxury real estate. They traced the hundreds of millions of dollars that went from company coffers to Bankman-Fried’s personal accounts.
The prosecution presented a series of relatively simple, two-page promissory notes. According to agreements signed by the defendant and Caroline Ellison, who ran hedge fund Alameda Research, Bankman-Fried borrowed more $1.1 billion in the year before his companies — FTX and Alameda — filed for bankruptcy.
Bankman-Fried admitted on the stand that there were likely more loans that weren’t properly documented, so the borrowing probably exceeded what was presented into evidence.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Secret emails
Much of the government’s case against Bankman-Fried hinges on the testimony, emails, and text messages from former top lieutenants who turned against him late last year.
In one email, shared by prosecutors, Bankman-Fried promised preferential treatment to Bahamian customers on the FTX cryptocurrency exchange.
In a message to Ryan Pinder, the attorney general and minister of legal affairs for the Bahamas, Bankman-Fried claimed FTX had “segregated funds for all Bahamian customers” and would be “more than happy to open up withdrawals for all Bahamian customers on FTX, so that they can, tomorrow, fully withdraw all of their assets, making them fully whole.”
The email was sent Nov. 9, one day after FTX had halted withdrawals and two days before it filed for bankruptcy. FTX users had collectively pulled $5 billion off the platform in what amounted to a bank run.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Two other separate email chains show that Bankman-Fried seriously mischaracterized his role at Alameda Research, according to prosecutors.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
In a message to Rob Creamer, the CEO of Geneva Trading and chairman of FIA Principal Traders Group, Bankman-Fried wrote “Alameda has a totally separate team” that he didn’t manage.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Bankman-Fried wrote in an email to a Wall Street Journal reporter that Alameda’s account access “is the same as others” and that its traders don’t have “any special access to client information, marketdata, or trading.” According to the government, those claims have been debunked through witness testimony and internal company documents and text messages.
Alameda’s preferential treatment is spelled out in the two exhibits listed below. They show Alameda’s “allow negative” feature, and a line of credit on FTX that was $65 billion compared to $150 million or less for all other customers on the exchange.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Google Docs
Executives at FTX and Alameda used Google Docs and Sheets to share important financial information, according to their testimony.
Ellison would send alternative versions of balance sheets, some omitting key financials like the amount of customer funds borrowed by Alameda to cover its liabilities, to Bankman-Fried. He would then decide what to send to lenders.
Bankman-Fried would also consider larger strategy decisions in memos to his top execs.
In one memo, Bankman-Fried laid out the merits of shuttering Alameda, pointing to the “PR hit from Alameda and FTX both existing.” He wrote that, “the current Alameda leadership is good, but not good enough to be able to trust with such a big operation.”
He also wrote personal memos after the business had collapsed.
In a Google Doc dated Dec. 25, Bankman-Fried referenced the $600 million-plus stake in Robinhood he’d acquired with capital from Alameda. He wondered whether he should “try calling up the broker HOOD is with and see if they’ll just give me the shares without thinking about it.”
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
A big part of the government’s case revolves around the ways Bankman-Fried allegedly directed spending of money at Alameda long after he was no longer officially running the hedge fund.
In a message to FTX’s then general counsel Can Sun, Bankman-Fried pushed to get a $250 million transfer to hedge fund Modulo Capital expedited in full within eight hours. Sun later testified about the transaction under a non-prosecution agreement with the government.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Getting chummy with celebrities
Bankman-Fried’s chummy ties with celebrities and his enthusiasm for spending hundreds of millions of dollars on endorsement deals were areas of focus for the government.
Prosecutors showed the court a spreadsheet of investments made in 2021. They included $205 million for FTX’s naming rights to Miami’s NBA arena, $150 million to Major League Baseball, $28.5 million to NBA star Stephen Curry, $50 million to quarterback Tom Brady and his then wife Giselle Bundchen, and $10 million to comedian Larry David. The deals on the spreadsheet amounted to a total of $1.13 billion.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Nishad Singh, who was FTX’s director of engineering, testified that the $300 million outlay on investment firm K5 was among the most troubling. He said Bankman-Fried sent him a term sheet detailing hundreds of millions of dollars of bonuses to owners Michael Kives and Bryan Baum. That followed a K5 dinner Bankman-Fried attended alongside Hillary Clinton, Katy Perry, Orlando Bloom, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Kris and Kylie Jenner.
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Singh said he told Bankman-Fried he was very concerned and that the K5 investment was “value extractive.” He also said he asked Bankman-Fried if the investment was made with his money or FTX’s. The spreadsheet showed it came from Alameda.
In a motion to dismiss a complaint in bankruptcy court against K5, the firm’s lawyers said the “plaintiffs attempt to make Kives and Baum complicit in SBF’s wrongdoing has no basis in fact.”
Government exhibit in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Leaked audio
In an all-hands meeting on the evening of Nov. 9, 2022, Alameda Research employees gathered in a circle to listen to Ellison, the CEO, who was sitting on a beanbag. She told staffers about Alameda’s borrowing from FTX, and said the exchange now had a “shortfall of user funds.”
Christian Drappi, a former software engineer at Alameda, was one of the 15 people in attendance at the meeting in the Hong Kong office. Ten others joined via video from the Bahamas.
In his testimony, Drappi described Ellison’s demeanor that night as “sunken.” He said she was “kinda slouching” and “did not display confident body language.”
In the recording of the Ellison meeting that was played for the jury, Drappi can be heard asking about FTX’s plan to pay back customers. Ellison said the company would raise money to fill the hole. Drappi asked Ellison if Alameda’s loans were collateralized through the spot margin group. She said they weren’t, and Drappi said, “That seems pretty bad.”
Caroline Ellison is questioned during Sam Bankman-Fried’s fraud trial over the collapse of FTX, the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange, at Federal Court in New York City, U.S., October 11, 2023 in this courtroom sketch.
Jane Rosenberg | Reuters
Encrypted messages
Of the hundreds of items entered into evidence, a bank of messages on encrypted app Signal paint perhaps the clearest picture of Bankman-Fried’s alleged crimes.
One thread, dubbed “small group chat,” included Ellison, Bankman-Fried, and Joe Bankman, the defendant’s father, who advised the company on tax-related issues and other things. Also in the group were Ramnik Arora, a former product lead for FTX; Ryne Miller, who was the company’s general counsel; Constance Wang, ex-operating chief; and former FTX executive Ryan Salame.
Prosecutors are relying heavily on text messages sent among FTX and Alameda Research executives in the case against Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
Early in the morning on Nov. 7, the defendant put forth some “potential todos,” including halting withdrawals, sending a “confident tweet thread” and reaching out to firms such as Silverlake, Sequoia, and Apollo as they “wake up over the next few hours” to try to shore up cash.
Later that morning, Salame linked to a tweet from an anonymous crypto trader saying, “cant wait for my FTX airdrop for not moving any of my funds.”
Bankman-Fried chimed in with different ideas about how to take advantage of the post in an apparent effort to provide false hope to FTX customers that they’d receive free tokens if they kept their funds on the platform.
Prosecutors are relying heavily on text messages sent among FTX and Alameda Research executives in the case against Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
The next day, Nov. 8, Ellison appealed to the group for help on optics and public messaging.
She wrote, “multiple people internally asking me whether they should continue to make statements to external parties like ‘Alameda is solvent.’ should i suggest they stall instead? just stall on responding to their messages? or what?”
That’s the same day FTX issued a pause on all customer withdrawals. The price of FTT, FTX’s native token, plummeted by over 75%. Out of options, Bankman-Fried turned to Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao, who announced he’d signed a nonbinding letter of intent to acquire FTX.
Prosecutors are relying heavily on text messages sent among FTX and Alameda Research executives in the case against Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
On Nov. 9, Ellison again looked to the group for guidance about how to handle the now infamous all-hands meeting of Alameda’s roughly 30 employees.
She proposed saying, “Alameda is probably going to wind down” and that there was “no pressure” to stay but help with “stuff like making sure our lenders get paid” would be “super appreciated.”
Bankman-Fried suggested she say something about there “being a future of some sort for those who are excited.”
Prosecutors are relying heavily on text messages sent among FTX and Alameda Research executives in the case against Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
The author’s visit
Author Michael Lewis, whose book profiling Bankman-Fried was published the day the trial began, was also the subject of some Signal exchanges.
In a chat on Jan. 5, 2022, Bankman-Fried alerted a group that included Ellison and Singh that Lewis would be coming to the Bahamas the next month to do reporting.
Ellison said her “instincts are more toward under the radar.” Bankman-Fried, a notorious press hound, responded, “same, except exactly the opposite.”
As the grand scheme collapsed months later, Ellison expressed a great deal of relief in a private chat with Bankman-Fried.
Ellison wrote, “this is the best mood I’ve been in in like a year tbh” (“tbh” is short for “to be honest”).
In three consecutive messages, Bankman-Fried responded, “wow,” “uh,” “congrats?”
Ellison wrote, “I think I just had an increasing dread of this day that was weighing on me for a long time, and now that it’s actually happening, it just feels great to get it over with one way or another.”
Prosecutors are relying heavily on text messages sent among FTX and Alameda Research executives in the case against Sam Bankman-Fried.
Source: SDNY
After years of teasing that other automakers would license Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system, Elon Musk has now admitted that no other automakers want to license it.
“They don’t want it!” He says.
For years, the bull case for Tesla (TSLA) has relied heavily on the idea that the company isn’t just an automaker, but an “AI and robotics company”, with its first robot product being an autonomous car.
CEO Elon Musk pushed the theory further, arguing that Tesla’s lead in autonomy was so great that legacy automakers would eventually have no choice but to license Full Self-Driving (FSD) to survive.
Back in early 2021, during the Q4 2020 earnings call, Musk first claimed that Tesla had “preliminary discussions” with other automakers about licensing the software. He reiterated this “openness” frequently, famously tweeting in June 2023 that Tesla was “happy to license Autopilot/FSD or other Tesla technology” to competitors.
The speculation peaked in April 2024, when Musk explicitly stated that Tesla was “in talks with one major automaker” and that there was a “good chance” a deal would be signed that year.
We now know that deal never happened. And thanks to comments from Ford CEO Jim Farley earlier this year, we have a good idea why. Farley, who was likely the other party in those “major automaker” talks, publicly shut down the idea of using FSD, stating clearly that “Waymo is better”.
Now, Musk appears to have given up on the idea of licensing Tesla FSD. In a post on X late last night, Musk acknowledged that discussions with other automakers have stalled, claiming that they asked for “unworkable requirements” for Tesla.
The CEO wrote:
“I’ve tried to warn them and even offered to license Tesla FSD, but they don’t want it! Crazy …
When legacy auto does occasionally reach out, they tepidly discuss implementing FSD for a tiny program in 5 years with unworkable requirements for Tesla, so pointless.”
Suppose you translate “unworkable requirements” from Musk-speak to automotive industry standard. In that case, it becomes clear what happened: automakers demanded a system that does what it says: drive autonomously, which means something different for Tesla.
Legacy automakers generally follow a “V-model” of validation. They define requirements, test rigorously, and validate safety before release. When Mercedes-Benz released its Drive Pilot system, a true Level 3 system, they accepted full legal liability for the car when the system is engaged.
In contrast, Tesla’s “aggressive deployment” strategy relies on releasing “beta” (now “Supervised”) software to customers and using them to validate the system. This approach has led to a litany of federal investigations and lawsuits.
Just this month, Tesla settled the James Tran vs. Tesla lawsuit just days before trial. The case involved a Model Y on Autopilot crashing into a stationary police vehicle, a known issue with Tesla’s system for years. By settling, Tesla avoided a jury verdict, but the message to the industry was clear: even Tesla knows it risks losing these cases in court.
Meanwhile, major automakers, such as Toyota, have partnered with Waymo to integrate its autonomous driving techonology into its consumer vehicles.
Electrek’s Take
The “unworkable requirements for Tesla” is an instant Musk classic. What were those requirements that were unachievable for Tesla? That it wouldn’t crash into stationary objects on the highway, such as emergency vehicles?
How dare they request something that crazy?
No Ford or GM executive is going to license a software stack that brings that kind of liability into their house. If they license FSD, they want Tesla to indemnify them against crashes. Tesla, knowing the current limitations of its vision-only system, likely refused.
To Musk, asking him to pay for FSD’s mistakes is an “unworkable requirement.” It’s always a driver error, and the fact that he always uses hyperbole to describe the level of safety being higher than that of humans has no impact on user abuse of the poorly named driver assistance systems in his view.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
CPSC warns Rad Power Bikes owners to stop using select batteries immediately due to fire risk
In an unprecedented move, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has issued a public safety warning urging owners of certain Rad Power Bikes e-bike batteries to immediately stop using them, citing a risk of fire, explosion, and potentially serious injury or death.
The warning, published today, targets Rad’s lithium-ion battery models RP-1304 and HL-RP-S1304, which were sold with some of the company’s most popular e-bikes, including the RadWagon 4, RadRunner 1 and 2, RadRunner Plus, RadExpand 5, RadRover 5 series, and RadCity 3 and 4 models. Replacement batteries sold separately are also included.
According to the CPSC, the batteries “can unexpectedly ignite and explode,” particularly when exposed to water or debris. The agency says it has documented 31 fires linked to the batteries so far, including 12 incidents of property damage totaling over $734,000. Alarmingly, several fires occurred when the battery wasn’t charging or when the bike wasn’t even in use.
Complicating the situation further, Rad Power Bikes – already facing significant financial turmoil – has “refused to agree to an acceptable recall,” according to the CPSC. The company reportedly told regulators it cannot afford to replace or refund the large number of affected batteries. Rad previously informed employees that it could be forced to shut down permanently in January if it cannot secure new funding, barely two weeks before this safety notice was issued by the CPSC.
For its part, Rad pushed back strongly on the CPSC’s characterization. A Rad Power Bikes Spokesperson explained in a statement to Electrek that the company “stands behind our batteries and our reputation as leaders in the ebike industry, and strongly disagrees with the CPSC’s characterization of certain Rad batteries as defective or unsafe.”
The company explained that its products meet or exceed stringent international safety standards, including UL-2271 and UL-2849, which are standards that the CPSC has proposed as a requirement but not yet implemented. Rad says its batteries have been repeatedly tested by reputable third-party labs, including during the CPSC investigation, and that those tests confirmed full compliance. Rad also claims the CPSC did not independently test the batteries using industry-accepted standards, and stresses that the incident rate cited by the agency represents a tiny fraction of a percent. While acknowledging that any fire report is serious, Rad maintains that lithium-ion batteries across all industries can be hazardous if damaged, improperly used, or exposed to significant water intrusion, and that these universal risks do not indicate a defect specific to Rad’s products.
The company says it entered the process hoping to collaborate with federal regulators to improve safety guidance and rider education, and that it offered multiple compromise solutions – including discounted upgrades to its newer Safe Shield batteries that were a legitimate leap forward in safety in the industry – but the CPSC rejected them. Rad argues that the agency instead demanded a full replacement program that would immediately bankrupt the company, leaving customers without support. It also warns that equating new technology with older products being “unsafe” undermines innovation, noting that the introduction of safer systems, such as anti-lock brakes, doesn’t retroactively deem previous generations faulty. Ultimately, Rad says clear, consistent national standards are needed so manufacturers can operate with confidence while continuing to advance battery safety.
Lithium-ion battery fires have become a growing concern across the US and internationally, with poorly made packs implicated in a rising number of deadly incidents.
While Rad Power Bikes states that no injuries or fatalities have been tied to these specific models, the federal warning marks one of the most serious e-bike battery advisories issued to date – and arrives at a moment when the once-dominant US e-bike brand is already fighting for survival.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
Rivian’s e-bike brand launches $250 smart helmet with breakthrough safety tech and lights
ALSO, the new micromobility brand spun out of Rivian, just announced official pricing for its long-awaited Alpha Wave helmet. The smart helmet, which introduces a brand-new safety tech called the Release Layer System (RLS), is now listed at $250, with “notify for pre-order” now open on ALSO’s site. Deliveries are expected to begin in spring 2026.
The $250 price point might sound steep, but ALSO is positioning the Alpha Wave as a top-tier lid that undercuts other premium smart helmets with similar tech – some of which push into the $400–500 range. That’s because the Alpha Wave is promising more than just upgraded comfort and design. The company claims the helmet will also deliver a significant leap in rotational impact protection.
The RLS system is made up of four internal panels that are engineered to release on impact, helping dissipate rotational energy – a major factor in many concussions. It’s being marketed as a next-gen alternative to MIPS and similar technologies, and could signal a broader shift in helmet safety standards if adopted widely.
Beyond protection, the Alpha Wave also packs a surprising amount of tech. Four wind-shielded speakers and two noise-canceling microphones are built in for taking calls, playing music, or following navigation prompts. And when paired with ALSO’s own TM-B electric bike, the helmet integrates with the bike’s onboard lighting system for synchronized rear lights and 200-lumen forward visibility.
The helmet is IPX6-rated for water resistance and charges via USB-C, making it easy to keep powered up alongside other modern gear.
Electrek’s Take
This helmet pushes the smart gear envelope. $250 isn’t nothing, but for integrated lighting, audio, and what might be a true leap forward in crash protection, it’s priced to shake things up in the high-end helmet space.
One area I’m not a huge fan of is the paired front and rear lights. Cruiser motorcycles have this same issue, with paired tail lights mounted close together sometimes being mistaken for a conventional four-wheeled vehicle farther away. I worry that the paired “headlights” and “taillights” of this helmet could be mistaken for a car farther down the road instead of the reality of a much closer cyclist. But hey, we’ll have to see.
The tech is pretty cool though, and if the RLS system holds up to its promise, we might be looking at the new bar for premium e-bike head protection.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024