In a significant legal development, U.S. district judge Lewis Kaplan has dismissed Sam Bankman-Fried's motion to dismiss the criminal charges filed against him. The decision was made on June 27, 2023, and marks a setback for the disgraced co-founder of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried.
Bankman-Fried's legal team sought to have the charges against him dismissed based on their belief that the manner in which he was charged violated the "rule of specialty," as stipulated in the extradition treaty between the Bahamas and the United States. However, Judge Kaplan found this argument unconvincing and without merit.
The specific charges (counts 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, and 13) that Bankman-Fried attempted to have dismissed were related to post-extradition proceedings. His legal team contended that these charges went beyond the scope of the extradition request, thereby violating the rule of specialty.
Judge Kaplan disagreed with this interpretation and concluded that the charges brought against Bankman-Fried fell within the permissible scope of the extradition treaty. Consequently, Bankman-Fried will have to face trial for the offenses specified in the extradition process.
According to Judge Kaplan, the charges against Bankman-Fried are linked by a common scheme. This scheme aimed to accelerate the growth of FTX and Alameda while enriching Bankman-Fried personally. The court filing provides details of this scheme, stating that it was intended to "accelerate the growth of FTX and Alameda and to enrich the defendant thereby."
Bankman-Fried also attempted to have counts 1 and 2, which involve charges of conspiring to commit and committing wire fraud on FTX customers, dismissed. His argument centered around the indictment's failure to mention any financial harm inflicted upon FTX customers. However, Judge Kaplan rejected this argument, stating that Bankman-Fried was wrong both factually and as a matter of law.
Throughout the proceedings, Bankman-Fried's arguments were repeatedly deemed unpersuasive by the judge. Kaplan maintained that the counts against Bankman-Fried are legally sufficient, despite the defendant's attempts to leverage language ambiguities and jurisdictional nuances to support his motion for dismissal.
Consequently, Judge Kaplan denied Bankman-Fried's motion to dismiss, finding the arguments either moot or without merit. However, the judge did not completely foreclose the possibility of future motions, leaving open the opportunity for renewal under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29. This decision paves the way for the criminal trial against Bankman-Fried to proceed.
The rejection of Bankman-Fried's attempt to dismiss the charges represents a significant development in the ongoing legal proceedings and underscores the seriousness of the allegations against him.
