At No Point During SBF's Extradition the Government Suggest It Was Waiving the Rule of Specialty

STATEMENT OF FACTS

II. The Bahamas Extradites Mr. Bankman-Fried Pursuant to Simplified Extradition Proceedings.

C. The Minister of Foreign Affairs Issues a Warrant of Surrender On All Counts Except for the Campaign Finance Conspiracy Count (Count 12).

Following the Magistrate’s hearing, the Minister of Foreign Affairs issued a Warrant of Surrender for Mr. Bankman-Fried under Section 17(3) of the Extradition Act, directing that Mr. Bankman-Fried be transferred into United States custody. Ex. 2 at SDNY_03_01098055. The Warrant of Surrender included a schedule of charges on which Mr. Bankman-Fried’s extradition was based, which reflected all the charges referenced in the Diplomatic Note, except for the charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States (Count 8 in the Original Indictment and now Count 12 in the S5 Indictment—to avoid confusion, this count will hereafter be referred to as “Count 12”). Id. at SDNY_03_01098056; Original Indictment ¶¶ 16-20; S5 Indictment ¶¶ 96- 101. Thus, Mr. Bankman-Fried’s extradition to the United States was based solely on the first seven counts listed in the Diplomatic Note (corresponding to Counts 1-7 of the Original Indictment).

Mr. Bankman-Fried was extradited to the United States shortly thereafter. At no point in the extradition process did Mr. Bankman-Fried, the Bahamian Magistrate or the Government suggest that the use of the simplified extradition process waived the protection of the rule of specialty (in fact, Mr. Bankman-Fried and the Magistrate acknowledged that the rule of specialty did apply). Indeed, the Extradition Act requires the Minister of Foreign Affairs to confirm that the rule of specialty applies in simplified extradition. Ex. 3 §§ 7(4)(a)(iii), 17(4) (providing that the Bahamian executive shall not order simplified extradition of defendant unless, inter alia, arrangement with the requesting state incorporates the rule of specialty and dual criminality requirement); [13] Lewis Decl. ¶¶ 4, 30-31, 34.

[13] The term “requesting state” is used herein to refer to the state seeking extradition of a defendant. The term “requested state” is used to refer to the state from which extradition is sought.