New Sam Bankman-Fried trial would be huge waste of court’s time, judge says
New Sam Bankman-Fried trial would be huge waste of court’s time, judge says
法官称：针对山姆·班克曼-弗里德的新审判将是对司法资源的巨大浪费
In an order denying Sam Bankman-Fried’s request for a new trial, a judge accused the disgraced FTX founder of wasting precious court resources on wild conspiracies. To the judge, the motion seemed like a last-ditch attempt to give himself a MAGA makeover that the Trump administration absolutely wasn’t buying. 在一份驳回山姆·班克曼-弗里德（Sam Bankman-Fried）重审请求的裁决书中，法官指责这位声名狼藉的 FTX 创始人利用荒谬的阴谋论浪费了宝贵的法庭资源。在法官看来，这一动议似乎是他为了给自己进行“MAGA（让美国再次伟大）式改造”而做的最后挣扎，而特朗普政府显然并不买账。
Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison in 2024 for “masterminding one of the largest financial frauds in American history,” US District Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote in his order. He was convicted on all charges, including wire fraud, conspiracy to commit securities fraud, commodities fraud, and money laundering. 美国地区法官刘易斯·卡普兰（Lewis Kaplan）在裁决书中写道，班克曼-弗里德因“策划了美国历史上最大的金融欺诈案之一”于 2024 年被判处 25 年监禁。他被判所有指控罪名成立，包括电信欺诈、共谋证券欺诈、商品欺诈和洗钱罪。
There is already an appeal pending in another court, the judge noted. But Bankman-Fried filed a separate motion for a new trial, claiming that there were “newly discovered” witnesses and evidence that might have helped his defense, if Joe Biden’s Department of Justice hadn’t intimidated them into refusing to testify or, in one case, lying on the stand. He also asked for a new judge, wanting Kaplan to recuse himself. 法官指出，目前在另一个法院已经有一项上诉正在审理中。但班克曼-弗里德又单独提交了一份重审动议，声称存在“新发现”的证人和证据，如果不是乔·拜登政府的司法部恐吓他们拒绝作证，或者在其中一个案例中诱导其在庭上撒谎，这些证据本可以帮助他的辩护。他还要求更换法官，希望卡普兰回避。
However, Kaplan pointed out that “none of the witnesses” were “newly discovered.” And more concerningly, Bankman-Fried offered no evidence that the witnesses could prove the “wildly conspiratorial” theory the FTX founder raised, claiming that their absence at the trial was a “product of government threats and retaliation,” the judge wrote. 然而，卡普兰指出，“这些证人中没有一个是‘新发现’的”。法官写道，更令人担忧的是，班克曼-弗里德没有提供任何证据证明这些证人能够证实他所提出的“荒诞阴谋论”，即他们缺席审判是“政府威胁和报复的产物”。
Bankman-Fried’s theory is “entirely contradicted by the record,” Kaplan said. He emphasized that granting Bankman-Fried’s request “would be a large waste of judicial resources as it could require another judge to familiarize himself or herself with an extensive and complicated record.” 卡普兰表示，班克曼-弗里德的理论“与庭审记录完全矛盾”。他强调，批准班克曼-弗里德的请求“将是对司法资源的巨大浪费，因为它可能需要另一位法官去熟悉一份庞大且复杂的记录”。
Additionally, all three witnesses that Bankman-Fried claimed could give crucial testimony in his defense were known to him throughout the trial, and he never sought to compel their testimony. And the “self-serving social-media posts” of one witness who now claims that he lied when testifying against Bankman-Fried—“Ryan Salame, who pleaded guilty”—must be met with “utmost suspicion,” Kaplan said. 此外，班克曼-弗里德声称能为其辩护提供关键证词的三名证人，他在整个审判过程中都是知情的，但他从未试图强制要求他们作证。卡普兰表示，其中一名现在声称自己在作证时撒谎的证人——“已认罪的瑞安·萨拉梅（Ryan Salame）”——其“自私自利的社交媒体帖子”必须受到“极大的怀疑”。
“If one were to take Salame at his current word, he lied under oath when pleading guilty before this Court,” Kaplan wrote. Even if taken seriously, “his out-of-court, unsworn statements could not come anywhere close to clearing the bar to warrant a new trial,” Kaplan said, deeming Salame’s credibility “highly questionable.” 卡普兰写道：“如果人们相信萨拉梅现在的话，那就意味着他在本法院认罪时是在宣誓后撒谎。”卡普兰表示，即使认真对待这些言论，“他庭外未经宣誓的陈述也远不足以达到准予重审的标准”，并认为萨拉梅的可信度“极其可疑”。
Further, “even if these individuals had testified for Bankman-Fried, his protestations that one or more of them would have supported his claims that FTX was not insolvent and that his victims all were compensated fully in the bankruptcy proceedings are inaccurate or misleading,” Kaplan concluded. 此外，卡普兰总结道：“即使这些人曾为班克曼-弗里德作证，他声称其中一人或多人会支持他关于 FTX 并未资不抵债、且其受害者在破产程序中已获得全额赔偿的说法，也是不准确或具有误导性的。”
In the order, Kaplan’s frustration seems palpable, as there may have been no need for him to rule on the motion at all after Bankman-Fried requested to withdraw it. But the judge said the ruling was needed after Bankman-Fried waited to file his withdrawal request until after the DOJ and the court wasted time responding and reviewing filings, the judge said. 在裁决书中，卡普兰的沮丧显而易见，因为在班克曼-弗里德请求撤回动议后，他本无需对此动议做出裁决。但法官表示，之所以仍需做出裁决，是因为班克曼-弗里德在司法部和法院已经浪费时间回应并审查了相关文件后，才提交撤回请求。
Troublingly, Bankman-Fried’s request to withdraw his request without prejudice would have allowed him to potentially request a new trial after the appeal ended. Based on the substance of the filing, that risked wasting future court resources, Kaplan determined. To prevent overburdening the justice system, Kaplan deemed it necessary to deny Bankman-Fried’s motion and request for recusal, rather than allow him to withdraw the filing without prejudice. 令人不安的是，班克曼-弗里德要求“无损撤回”（without prejudice）其请求，这将使他有可能在上诉结束后再次申请重审。卡普兰认定，根据该文件的实质内容，这有浪费未来司法资源的风险。为了防止给司法系统增加负担，卡普兰认为有必要直接驳回班克曼-弗里德的动议和回避请求，而不是允许他无损撤回。
Failed MAGA makeover
失败的“MAGA式改造”
Kaplan suggested that the motion was not a sincere effort to correct the record but rather part of a documented “plan” that Bankman-Fried concocted in a Google Doc “after FTX declared bankruptcy but before he was indicted,” hoping “to rescue his reputation.” This plan, Kaplan wrote, required Bankman-Fried to “come out” as a Republican “against the woke agenda,” by posting on X and going on high-profile news shows or right-leaning podcasts. 卡普兰指出，该动议并非为了纠正记录的真诚努力，而是班克曼-弗里德在“FTX 宣布破产后、被起诉前”于一份谷歌文档中炮制的“计划”的一部分，他希望借此“挽救自己的声誉”。卡普兰写道，该计划要求班克曼-弗里德通过在 X 上发帖、参加高调的新闻节目或右翼播客，以共和党人的身份“公开反对觉醒议程（woke agenda）”。
Seemingly, Bankman-Fried hoped that if he could “get as much support as possible,” he might meet a more lenient DOJ during the appeal or possibly even get a pardon from Donald Trump. When he drafted the plan, Bankman-Fried wrote that these were “random probably bad ideas,” but since his pre-trial house arrest and later incarceration, Bankman-Fried has “followed his plan to a remarkable degree,” Kaplan wrote. 班克曼-弗里德似乎希望，如果他能“获得尽可能多的支持”，他可能会在上诉期间遇到更宽容的司法部，甚至可能获得唐纳德·特朗普的赦免。卡普兰写道，班克曼-弗里德在起草该计划时曾写道，这些是“随机的、可能是糟糕的主意”，但自审前软禁及后来入狱以来，班克曼-弗里德“在很大程度上执行了他的计划”。
Ultimately, Kaplan agreed with Trump’s DOJ, which drafted a robust filing in opposition to Bankman-Fried’s request for a new trial. In it, DOJ attorney Sean Buckley criticized the FTX founder for his “incoherent” attempt to claim “political victimhood” in suggesting that his trial under Biden officials was unfair. 最终，卡普兰认同了特朗普政府司法部的观点，该部门起草了一份强有力的文件，反对班克曼-弗里德的重审请求。在文件中，司法部律师肖恩·巴克利（Sean Buckley）批评这位 FTX 创始人试图通过暗示他在拜登政府官员治下的审判不公来宣称自己是“政治受害者”，这种做法是“语无伦次”的。