For thousands of former FTX customers, the fallout from the exchange's collapse isn’t an abstract legal debate. It’s frozen savings, stalled businesses, and years of uncertainty tied to one of the largest financial failures in recent memory. More than a year after a Manhattan jury found Sam Bankman-Fried guilty of fraud and conspiracy, the former crypto executive is now asking for another chance in court, filing a motion that seeks to undo the verdict that sent him to prison.
Bankman-Fried, once celebrated as a billionaire founder who promised to make crypto safer and more accessible, was convicted in November 2023 on seven criminal counts tied to the misuse of customer funds at FTX and its affiliated trading firm, Alameda Research.
In March 2024, he was sentenced to 25 years in federal prison. Prosecutors described the case as one of the most significant financial frauds in modern U.S. history, arguing that billions of dollars in customer deposits were diverted to cover trading losses, political donations, venture investments, and personal expenses.
Now incarcerated, Bankman-Fried has filed a pro se motion under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a legal mechanism that allows a judge to order a new trial if newly discovered evidence or a miscarriage of justice is shown. Because of his imprisonment, the filing was submitted on his behalf by his mother, Stanford Law School professor emerita Barbara Fried. The motion is separate from his ongoing appeal and focuses specifically on claims that certain testimony was improperly absent from the trial.
Emmanuel Oyedeji
The Argument for a New Trial
At the center of the request is the claim that testimony from two former FTX executives was not presented in a way that would have allowed the jury to fully assess the defense’s position. Bankman-Fried argues that this missing testimony could have challenged key elements of the government’s narrative about intent and decision-making inside the company, particularly in the chaotic days leading up to FTX’s collapse. His filing contends that without it, the jury did not hear a complete account of events that ultimately pushed the exchange into bankruptcy.
That collapse, in November 2022, unfolded at remarkable speed. Once valued at $32 billion and backed by prominent investors, FTX imploded after reports revealed that Alameda Research held large amounts of illiquid FTT tokens issued by FTX itself. As confidence evaporated and customers rushed to withdraw funds, the platform could not meet demand. Bankruptcy filings later revealed an estimated multibillion-dollar shortfall in customer assets, exposing deep commingling between FTX and Alameda and setting the stage for the criminal trial that followed.
The ripple effects were immediate and global. Crypto prices plunged, regulators intensified scrutiny of digital asset firms, and trust in centralized exchanges eroded sharply. The case became a defining moment for the industry, accelerating calls for clearer oversight and stricter governance standards.
On the day of the verdict, coverage from inside the Manhattan courthouse captured the intensity of the moment. As journalist Matthew Russell Lee reported, “SDNY COURTHOUSE, Feb 10 – On the US v Sam Bankman-Fried trial, hours after the guilty verdict, a book was published: ‘Crypto Criminal: The Conviction of Sam Bankman-Fried: As live-tweeted and investigated from inside the SDNY courthouse by Matthew Russell Lee.’” The speed at which the case entered the public record underscored how closely it was followed far beyond crypto circles.
The judge overseeing the case will now decide whether the request for a new trial meets the strict standards required under federal law. If denied, the conviction and sentence will stand while the appellate process continues. If granted, it would reopen one of the most consequential crypto trials in U.S. history, potentially reshaping how the collapse of FTX is legally interpreted.
Acquah Nana Yeboah
