Sentenced to 25 Years, FTX Founder Fights Back Claiming Evidence Was Unfairly Excluded

▲ FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried/ChatGPT-generated image

Sam Bankman-Fried, who was sentenced to 25 years in prison over the FTX bankruptcy scandal, has entered a new phase in his legal battle by claiming in his appeal that the presiding judge used improper methods similar to those employed in the case against U.S. President Donald Trump to block evidence favorable to him.

According to financial media outlet Benzinga on February 20 (local time), attorneys for former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) filed an appellate brief arguing that Judge Lewis Kaplan seriously infringed on the defendant’s right to present a full defense during the trial. The defense strongly criticized Kaplan for applying the same evidentiary exclusion logic seen in President Trump’s trial, thereby creating an environment unfavorable to Bankman-Fried.

Bankman-Fried’s legal team took issue with the court’s decision to exclude evidence showing that he acted based on advice from FTX’s then-legal counsel, as well as key testimony indicating the possibility of recovering customer assets. They argued that while Judge Kaplan broadly accepted evidence presented by prosecutors, he imposed a far stricter standard on materials submitted by the defense, effectively depriving Bankman-Fried of his right to a fair trial. The central claim is that this legal strategy closely resembled the approach used in proceedings targeting President Donald Trump.

Currently serving a 25-year sentence, Bankman-Fried was convicted on charges of fraud and money laundering involving tens of billions of dollars. His attorneys added that if the excluded evidence had been presented to the jury, their argument—that the collapse was an unintended management failure amid turmoil in the virtual asset market, including Bitcoin (BTC)—might have gained greater credibility. At the time, FTX’s financial shortfall was estimated at approximately $8 billion.

The appeal is drawing significant attention from the industry amid tighter regulation of virtual assets. If the appellate court accepts Bankman-Fried’s arguments and orders a retrial, legal interpretations surrounding the criminal liability of virtual asset exchange operators could change fundamentally. Some in the legal community have described Judge Kaplan’s management of the trial as exceptionally strict and are closely watching the potential ripple effects of the appeal’s outcome on the broader virtual asset industry.

Bankman-Fried’s legal fight has expanded beyond the issue of reducing one individual’s sentence into a broader debate over the fairness of the U.S. judicial system. Attention is focused on how the strategic appeal referencing President Trump’s case will influence the appellate court’s decision. The virtual asset market views the outcome of this lawsuit as a potential new benchmark for future regulatory enforcement and judicial handling.

*Disclaimer: This article is for investment reference purposes only, and we are not responsible for any investment losses resulting from reliance on it. The content should be interpreted solely for informational purposes.*