Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s legal team has once again appealed to the presiding judge, Judge Lewis Kaplan, in a bid to alter the jury instructions in his ongoing legal case.
The defense attorneys have specifically requested that the jury take into account the role of English law in shaping FTX’s terms of service.
In their proposal to Judge Kaplan, the defense team argues that in order for misappropriation to be established, there must have existed a trust, fiduciary, or similar relationship between FTX and its customers.
However, they highlight that FTX’s terms of service have explicitly stated that no such relationship existed between the company and its users.
The defense attorneys articulated their argument as follows: “Under English law, the Terms of Service do not create a trust relationship or similar fiduciary relationship between FTX and its customers.
Nor, under English law, do any representations made after a customer agreed to the Terms of Service create a trust relationship or similar fiduciary relationship.”
READ MORE: El Salvador Poised to Emerge as the Singapore of the Americas
They emphasized that even if a customer subjectively expected, understood, or believed in such a relationship, it does not legally create one under English law.
To bolster their case, the defense team cited precedents from various cases in the United Kingdom, underscoring the consistency of English law in not recognizing implied trust or fiduciary relationships based solely on subjective expectations.
Throughout the course of the case, Bankman-Fried’s legal representatives have made numerous requests to the judge, including appeals for early bail before the trial due to insufficient amenities for adequate preparation.
However, most of these requests have been denied by the court.
Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of FTX, currently faces multiple charges related to fraud and misappropriation of customer funds for personal expenses.
Bankman-Fried has consistently maintained his innocence throughout the trial, vehemently denying any misuse of funds and asserting that he did not defraud his customers.
Additionally, he has faced previous allegations of witness tampering in connection to the ongoing legal proceedings.
Discover the Crypto Intelligence Blockchain Council
