Sam Bankman-Fried Challenges 25-Year Sentence With New Trial Bid
- Fried seeks a retrial based on asserted evidence regarding FTX solvency and repayment.
- He contested findings that customer funds were misused through Alameda Research.
- Judges will evaluate whether his motion satisfies the legal threshold for the conviction.
Convicted former cryptocurrency executive Sam Bankman-Fried on Tuesday asked a Manhattan federal court to grant him a new trial, citing newly discovered evidence about FTX’s solvency and its ability to repay customers. The 32-year-old, who serves a 25-year prison sentence after his 2023 fraud conviction, argues that fresh information challenges prosecutors’ claim that he looted $8 billion in customer funds.
His mother, Stanford Law School professor Barbara Fried, filed the motion on his behalf in the Southern District of New York. The request adds another legal step to Bankman-Fried’s ongoing fight against his conviction.
New Trial Bid Centers on Solvency Claims
In the filing, Bankman-Fried contends that new evidence regarding FTX’s financial condition could justify reopening the case. He maintains that prosecutors framed the exchange’s collapse as outright theft rather than a failure tied to liquidity pressures. He argues that evidence about the company’s later solvency deserves examination before a new jury.
At his 2023 trial, prosecutors said Bankman-Fried directed Alameda Research to commingle billions of dollars in FTX customer deposits. They told jurors he used those funds as loans to support risky cryptocurrency futures trading on the exchange he co-founded and controlled. The jury convicted him on fraud charges tied to that conduct.
Now, Bankman-Fried claims testimony absent from the original trial could change the outcome. The filing notes that figures such as former FTX executive Ryan Salame did not testify during the proceedings. Salame fought a separate legal battle. The motion asserts that such testimony could support a reassessment of the government’s theory.
Appeals, Judicial Skepticism, and Political Claims
Since his conviction, Bankman-Fried has pursued multiple legal challenges. He appealed his conviction before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In November, appellate judges expressed skepticism toward his argument that he did not receive a fair trial.
His appeal also focused on FTX’s solvency after its collapse. He has repeated that claim on social media platform X. Yet during November arguments, judges questioned whether solvency addressed the core fraud charges. Circuit Judge Maria Araújo Kahn stated, “Part of the government’s theory of the case is that the defendant misrepresented to investors that their money was safe.” She added that the jury found the funds were used as prosecutors described.
Separately, President Donald Trump recently said he would not consider clemency for Bankman-Fried. Bankman-Fried has posted on X, through a proxy, alleging he was a victim of what he calls the Biden administration’s “lawfare machine.” He has attempted to align himself with Trump following Trump’s re-election, claiming both faced “bogus charges.” During the 2023 trial, prosecutors disclosed a document in which Bankman-Fried considered “come out as a Republican” to avoid culpability.
Related: From Vision to Void: The Story of Sam Bankman-Fried
Legal Uncertainty and Next Steps
The new trial motion, first reported by Inner City Press, marks his latest effort to challenge his conviction. The filing argues that the trial court excluded defense evidence that he intended to repay customers and believed he could ultimately return their funds. He continues to press that claim in a separate appeal pending before the Second Circuit.
Still, it remains unclear what specific new evidence he discovered or how it could persuade a judge to grant a retrial. Federal judges in Manhattan will now decide whether the motion meets the legal threshold required for reopening the case. Can newly discovered evidence about FTX’s solvency alter a conviction rooted in findings of misappropriation?
For now, the motion sits before the court, while Bankman-Fried continues to pursue relief through both appeals and public statements.
