Sam Bankman-Fried's legal team is preparing to present an expert witness to counter the testimony provided by former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison and other witnesses regarding the extent of financial connections between FTX and the trading firm. They recently informed New York District Judge Lewis Kaplan in an October 23 letter that Joseph Pimbley, affiliated with litigation advisory firm PF2 Securities, will serve as the expert witness in Bankman-Fried's defense.
Pimbley's testimony will be based on data obtained from the FTX database. It will highlight that Alameda's credit line with FTX fluctuated between approximately $1 billion and $3 billion from October 2021 to September 2022. Furthermore, it will illustrate that in June 2022, these numbers fell on a monthly basis. The purpose of this testimony is to establish a precise timeline for the credit line's creation.
The expert witness will also point out that most of the non-FTX and non-Alameda users maintain balances in USD, Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Tether. Moreover, over 75% of non-FTX and Alameda user balances originate from accounts with features like spot margin capabilities, spot margin lending capabilities, or show futures activity. This information will provide context for the former FTX executive's testimony.
Pimbley's testimony is intended to challenge the statements made by Caroline Ellison, Gary Wang, Nishad Singh, and Adam Yedidia regarding Alameda's credit line and the utilization of margin trading by FTX customers. It particularly seeks to address Ellison's claim that Alameda had an "essentially unlimited credit line with FTX" and Wang's statement that the company borrowed "approximately $3 billion" from this credit line.
Pimbley, who will be paid $720 an hour plus work-related expenses, has affirmed that he possesses no financial stake in the outcome of this case. He is one of seven expert witnesses enlisted by Bankman-Fried's legal team, although Judge Kaplan previously barred them from providing testimony. However, he allowed the possibility for these experts to testify in the future should their testimony be in response to that of government witnesses or designed to clarify their claims.
