Former FTX chief Sam Bankman-Fried leaves the Federal Courthouse following a bail listening to in New York City on July 26, 2023.

Angela Weiss/AFP through Getty Images

disguise caption

toggle caption

Angela Weiss/AFP through Getty Images

Former FTX chief Sam Bankman-Fried leaves the Federal Courthouse following a bail listening to in New York City on July 26, 2023.

Angela Weiss/AFP through Getty Images

Sam Bankman-Fried, the previous FTX CEO, was ordered to jail on Friday after a decide revoked his bail for alleged witness tampering.

The disgraced crypto mogul had been dwelling beneath home arrest at his mother and father’ house in Palo Alto, Calif., after posting an eye-popping $250 million bond.

Bankman-Fried, broadly generally known as SBF, was awaiting a trial set to start on Oct. 2 after being charged by the U.S. authorities final 12 months of orchestrating one of many largest monetary frauds in historical past. The former crypto star faces the prospect of spending the remainder of his life in jail if convicted of these costs.

But authorities prosecutors had sought to revoke his bail and have SBF despatched to jail till his trial after accusing the FTX founding father of witness tampering.

Prosecutors accused SBF of leaking personal diary entries of his former girlfriend, Caroline Ellison, to The New York Times.

Ellison was the previous head of Alameda Research, a hedge fund SBF co-founded. After pleading responsible to fraud costs herself, Ellison was more likely to testify towards Bankman-Fried in court docket.

On Friday, the U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan sided with prosecutors and ordered SBF detained, saying the FTX CEO had tried to intimidate witnesses and taint the jury pool.

“There is probable cause to believe that the defendant has attempted to tamper with witnesses at least twice,” Kaplan mentioned on the listening to in response to media reviews.

SBF’s legal professionals mentioned they intend to enchantment the choice.

Talking to media

The alleged leak of Ellison’s diary, which included reflections on her relationship with Bankman-Fried and a few of her skilled misgivings, was the final straw for prosecutors.

Hours after the Times posted the piece, the prosecution filed a proper request with the decide to change SBF’s bail phrases. They argued that by leaking the paperwork the defendant hoped “to portray a key cooperator testifying against him in a poor and inculpatory light.”

It was an try, they mentioned, to “intimidate and corruptly persuade Ellison with respect to her upcoming trial testimony, as well as an effort to influence or prevent the testimony of other potential trial witnesses by creating the specter that their most intimate business is at risk of being reported in the press.”

Prosecutors claimed the article within the Times was the most recent in a string of examples of Bankman-Fried flouting the phrases of his bail settlement, together with speaking to different media.

Prosecutors highlighted what number of conversations the defendant has had with reporters since he was charged.

They mentioned Bankman-Fried has participated in additional than 1,000 cellphone calls with journalists, together with greater than 500 with the creator Michael Lewis, who’s writing a e book about Bankman-Fried.

Damian Williams, U.S. lawyer for the Southern District of New York, broadcasts the indictment of Samuel Bankman-Fried in New York City on Dec. 13, 2022. SBF has been accused of orchestrating one of many largest monetary frauds in historical past.

Stephanie Keith/Getty Images

disguise caption

toggle caption

Stephanie Keith/Getty Images

Damian Williams, U.S. lawyer for the Southern District of New York, broadcasts the indictment of Samuel Bankman-Fried in New York City on Dec. 13, 2022. SBF has been accused of orchestrating one of many largest monetary frauds in historical past.

Stephanie Keith/Getty Images

Bankman-Fried’s attorneys unsuccessfully argued towards his detention on First Amendment grounds, and in separate filings, The New York Times Company and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press advised the choice to jail the defendant might have a chilling impact on free speech.

SBF’s legal professionals had additionally argued that jailing his consumer would make it more durable to defend himself towards authorities costs given the large quantity of fabric they wanted to confer on with their consumer.

Last month, Judge Kaplan had imposed a brief gag order on SBF as he sought to resolve on the accusations of witness tampering.