The U.S. Division of Justice (DOJ) and disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) are at present entangled in a authorized tussle over their respective witnesses’ listing, in line with Sept. 11 court docket filings.
CryptoSlate beforehand reported that the DOJ and SBF had moved to disqualify all of the skilled witnesses referred to as upon by every occasion, citing varied causes, together with deceptive expertise and inadequate disclosure filings.
Each events, nevertheless, have filed new defenses on why the Courtroom ought to approve their witnesses.
SBF defends witnesses
Based on SBF attorneys, the federal government’s opposition to their consumer’s skilled witness listing is overreaching as a result of none of their proposed testimony can be prejudicial or usurp the capabilities of the Courtroom or the jury.
The attorneys argued that the motions have been additional makes an attempt by the federal government to thwart SBF’s elementary proper to current a protection and even to introduce proof that is likely to be inconsistent with their theories.
They added that the federal government was “seeing ghosts” as not one of the witnesses would supply “improper opinion relating to Mr. Bankman-Fried’s data of essential details or his intent with respect to the crimes with which he’s charged.”
SBF’s witness listing features a lawyer, a regulation professor, an information analytics skilled, a monetary skilled, and consultants. They would supply witness testimony on FTX operations and the agency’s infrastructure.
The federal government says its skilled testimony is ‘mandatory and acceptable.’
In its filing, the U.S. authorities argued that the testimony of its sole witness, Professor Peter Easton, would play an important function in serving to the jury contemplate the monetary proof within the case.
A part of the submitting reads:
“Professor Peter Easton will assist the jury perceive Alameda Analysis’s substantial destructive balances on FTX.com, the commingling and use of FTX buyer funds, and the ensuing deficits in FTX and Alameda Analysis financial institution accounts and cryptocurrency wallets.”
The U.S. authorities added that Professor Easton had drawn his testimony from analyzing dozens of financial institution accounts, knowledge from FTX’s transaction database, knowledge from Alameda Analysis’s lenders, cryptocurrency pricing knowledge, and blockchain data.
Based on the federal government, SBF’s transfer to reject this testimony relies on a misreading and inconsistent with the regulation.
The submit SBF, US justice department wrangle over expert witness credibility appeared first on CryptoSlate.
Discussion about this post