In a dramatic legal maneuver, imprisoned FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried is challenging his 25-year fraud sentence, filing a pro se motion on February 10 that accuses federal prosecutors of suppressing evidence and rushing to judgment. The embattled thirty-three-year-old crypto mogul now insists his convicted exchange was never truly insolvent. Citing newly surfaced testimony and internal data, Bankman-Fried is demanding not just a new trial, but an entirely new judge to oversee it.
Three key takeaways from this developing story: Bankman-Fried claims the Department of Justice withheld critical data that would have proven FTX was solvent during his original trial. He further alleges that federal prosecutors intimidated potential defense witnesses, including former FTX.US co-CEO Ryan Salame. And legal experts say the Rule 33 motion faces long odds, but it introduces new scrutiny into the speed and tactics of one of the most high-profile financial prosecutions in recent history.
The former crypto kingpin, now serving time at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, filed the motion under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a narrow legal avenue that permits courts to vacate a conviction in the interest of justice. But what makes this filing different from a standard appeal is the accusation of deliberate governmental suppression. Bankman-Fried argues that prosecutors engaged in “lawfare” and that Judge Lewis Kaplan exhibited “manifest prejudice” by accelerating the trial timeline, effectively barring the defense from presenting a full picture of FTX’s financial standing.
Central to the motion is the declaration of Daniel Chapsky, the former head of data science at FTX.US. According to the filing, Chapsky’s forensic analysis directly contradicts the government’s central claim that eight billion dollars in customer funds had vanished without a trace. The data, Bankman-Fried contends, would have shown that FTX held sufficient assets to cover liabilities, challenging the narrative of catastrophic collapse that shaped public perception and the jury’s verdict.
The motion also references potential testimony from Ryan Salame, the former co-CEO of FTX’s Bahamian subsidiary, who is currently serving his own seven-and-a-half-year sentence. Bankman-Fried asserts that Salame and others were prepared to testify in his favor but were effectively silenced by prosecutorial intimidation. While Salame has not publicly commented on the filing, his inclusion in the motion signals a strategic attempt to reframe the case as one where the defense was hamstrung before it could even begin.
This legal push arrives at a moment when the broader cryptocurrency industry has moved aggressively to distance itself from the FTX collapse, implementing stricter compliance protocols and market safeguards. Yet Bankman-Fried’s filing threatens to reopen wounds the sector has worked hard to heal, injecting fresh uncertainty into the ongoing asset liquidation process overseen by bankruptcy trustees. If his claims gain traction, they could disrupt the distribution of remaining FTX funds to creditors and complicate the government’s broader enforcement posture toward digital asset platforms.
Still, legal observers are quick to temper expectations. Rule 33 motions are notoriously difficult to win, particularly when filed pro se and after sentencing. Federal appeals courts generally afford trial judges wide discretion, and without compelling new evidence that could not have been discovered earlier, the motion is widely viewed as a long-shot attempt to reset a case that has already been decided in the court of public opinion. Even so, the filing succeeds in raising questions about the completeness of the record and the intensity of prosecutorial zeal in the government’s signature crypto case.
As Bankman-Fried continues to maintain that the money was “always there,” his motion sets the stage for a protracted legal battle that could extend well beyond his current incarceration. Whether this is a final act of defiance or the beginning of a genuine evidentiary reckoning, the filing ensures that the FTX saga is far from over.
