US prosecutors seek to ban SBF from Signal after alleged witness contact
Federal prosecutors have requested that former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s (SBF) bail situations are modified to stop additional alleged makes an attempt at influencing witnesses’ testimonies.
Courtroom paperwork filed on Jan. 27 revealed that The Division of Justice (DOJ) had requested United States District Courtroom Decide Lewis Kaplan to ban Bankman-Fried from speaking with “present or former workers” of FTX or Alameda.
The prosecutors have requested this after they alleged that Bankman-Fried had reached out to Ryne Miller, the present Basic Counsel of FTX US, over Sign and electronic mail on Jan. 15, trying to “affect” Miller’s testimony. The doc quoted:
“I might actually like to reconnect and see if there’s a means for us to have a constructive relationship, use one another as assets when attainable, or a minimum of vet issues with one another.”
The prosecutors additionally requested that Bankman-Fried is banned from utilizing encrypted communication functions.
“The defendant shall not use any encrypted or ephemeral name or messaging software, together with however not restricted to Sign.”
The doc additional alleged that Bankman-Fried’s use of Sign is in keeping with “a historical past” of utilizing the appliance for obstructive functions.
Associated: FTX chapter lawyer: debtors face ‘assault by Twitter’ stemming from Sam Bankman-Fried
It was beforehand reported in December 2022 that Bankman-Fried denied any involvement or data of a “Wirefraud” group chat on Sign, hours earlier than his arrest by Bahamian police.
The group chat reportedly included members of Bankman-Fried’s interior circle, together with FTX co-founder Zixiao “Gary” Wang, FTX engineer Nishad Singh and former Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison, who allegedly used the group to ship secret details about FTX and Alameda within the lead-up to the collapse.
This comes after attorneys representing FTX within the chapter proceedings had reportedly argued on Jan. 26 that Bankman-Fried’s quick household ought to face questioning relating to any monetary advantages they could have obtained from the alternate.
