On September 15, the US government responded to inquiries posed by the defense to potential jurors in the case of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried. He faces seven charges of fraud and money laundering associated with the collapse of the cryptocurrency exchange, charges that could result in a lengthy prison sentence.
Both the defense and the government submitted their respective lists of questions to the court on September 11, revealing contrasting selection criteria.
In a letter addressed to Judge Lewis Kaplan of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, US Attorney Damian Williams raised objections to four out of the 14 pretrial segments proposed by the defense. These segments pertained to questions to be asked during Voir Dire, the process of questioning potential jurors. Williams argued that the defense's pretrial questions included numerous queries that were unnecessary and time-consuming, often leading to open-ended discussions, as well as repetitive, prejudicial, and argumentative questions.
Specifically, Williams contested questions within sections related to pretrial advocacy, the philosophy of the effective altruism movement, political donations and lobbying, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Conversely, Williams asserted that the government's questions were standard, neutral, and appropriate. Both sides agreed on the importance of inquiring about prospective jurors' views on cryptocurrencies. Among the defense's questions was one asking if potential jurors believed that when a company in the cryptocurrency or financial industry fails, only the company owners are to blame. Bankman -Fried has entered a plea of not guilty to the charges against him, with his trial scheduled to commence on October 3 in New York.
