USA v. Sam Bankman-Fried: Fraud, Bribery, and the Road to Justice
by Legal PDF: Tech Court CasesMarch 19th, 2024
Too Long; Didn't Read
The court filing in USA v. Samuel Bankman-Fried details charges including fraud, bribery, obstruction of justice, and more. It outlines sentencing guidelines, restitution, and forfeiture, providing a comprehensive overview of the case against Bankman-Fried.
USA v. Samuel Bankman-Fried Court Filing, retrieved on March 15, 2024 is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This is the table of links with all parts.
Case Number: 1:22-cr-00673-LAK
Plaintiffs: United States of America
Defendant: Samuel Bankman-Fried
Filing Date: March 15, 2024
Location: United States District Court Southern District of New York
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. The Offense Conduct Proven at Trial
II. The Defendant’s Scheme to Make Unlawful Political Contributions
III. The Defendant’s Scheme to Bribe Chinese Government Officials
IV. The Defendant’s Banking Misconduct
V. The Defendant Tried to Deflect Blame and Evade Responsibility After FTX Declared Bankruptcy
VI. The Defendant Obstructed Justice
A. Use of Signal to Auto-Delete Messages
B. The Defendant’s Witness Tampering
APPLICATION OF THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES
I. Calculation of the Applicable Sentencing Guidelines
II. The Defendant’s Challenges to the Guidelines Calculation Lack Merit
A. The Evidence at Trial Proved That the Loss Amounts Is at Least $10 Billion
B. The Number of Victims Enhancement Is Applicable
C. The Bankruptcy Fraud Enhancement Is Applicable
D. The “Relocating,” “Outside the United States,” or “Sophisticated Means” Enhancement Applies
F. The Enhancement for Abuse of Trust Is Applicable
G. The Enhancement for Obstruction of Justice Is Warranted
III. The Guidelines Do Not Overstate the Seriousness of the Offense
A SENTENCE OF 40 TO 50 YEARS’ IMPRISONMENT IS NECESSARY
I. The Nature, Circumstances, and Seriousness of the Offense Warrant a Very Significant Sentence
II. A Sentence of 40 to 50 Years Is Necessary to Protect the Public and for Specific Deterrence
III. A Very Significant Sentence Is Necessary for General Deterrence
IV. The Defendant’s History and Characteristics Do Not Warrant a Significant Variance
V. A Sentence of 40 to 50 Years Is Necessary to Avoid Sentencing Disparities
II. The Court Should Order Forfeiture
III. The Court Should Order Victim Compensation Through Remission as an Alternative to Restitution
About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.
This court case retrieved on March 15, 2024, from storage.courtlistener is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction.
L O A D I N G
. . . comments & more!
. . . comments & more!
