Activity tagged "law"

Posted:
Dear Judge Kaplan: I am writing to respond to your Memorandum Order of march 23, 2026, requesting me to state whether an attorney wrote either my rule 33 motion or supporting memorandum "in whole or in substantial part." (I am assuming that the inclusion of Mr. Chapsky's accompanying Affidavit was inadvertent, as I neither wrote nor purported to write that.) I conceived of the Rule 33 Motion, formulated the arguments, drafted multiple versions of it myself, and did the bulk of the legal research while I was at MDC Brooklyn and had better access to legal materials as well as a word processor. You asked about the three attorneys of record in other stages of this case; none of them had any significant input into the Rule 33 Motion. I have not discussed it with them or shared any drafts with them. Mr. Mukasey and Ms . Young only represented me in the sentencing phase, and no longer do so . While Ms. Shapiro is still representing me on my appeal, she is not representing me on this matter and I have not consulted her on it. I also shared drafts with my parents, Barbara Fried and Joe Bankman. They made editorial and organizational suggestions, some of which I incorporated into the motion. They also helped print it, as I no longer had access to a word processor. I also shared earlier drafts with a New York attorney who was originally hired to represent me on the Rule 33 Motion before I decided to represent myself; they had no significant input into the ultimate motion. I am the ultimate author of the documents and wrote the bulk of them myself, but can't comment on how you will ultimately interpret the standard in practice. As I have had to focus on responding to these questions rather than drafting a response to the prosecution's opposition, and because I do not believe I will get a fair hearing on this topic in front of you, I am now requesting to withdraw the Rule 33 motion, without prejudice to renewing it after my direct appeal and the related request for reassignment have been ruled upon. Finally, I am the author of this letter, but did consult with my parents about it, since it concerns both of them . Isl Sam Bankman-Fried prose 2026-04-13 Lompoc, CA

Sam Bankman-Fried’s affidavit has arrived. He says his attorneys of record had no input into his motion for a new trial, but that he shared drafts with his parents (both attorneys). “They made editorial and organizational suggestions, some of which I incorporated”

He also writes “As I have had to focus on responding to these questions rather than drafting a response to the prosecution's opposition, and because I do not believe I will get a fair hearing on this topic in front of you, I am now requesting to withdraw the Rule 33 motion” (for a new trial)

Posted:

The Binance crypto exchange has just filed a defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal over its article reporting that Binance's own compliance investigators had found $1 billion in transfers to Iran-backed terror groups, and then were fired.

The article, and related investigations by the New York Times and Fortune, were cited in an inquiry over the alleged sanctions evasion by Senator Blumenthal, and a request by Sen. Van Hollen and others for an investigation by the Treasury and Justice Departments. Today the WSJ reported that the DOJ had opened such an investigation.

Binance spends much of the filing complaining that news outlets like the WSJ do not give them enough credit for how hard they're trying. I'm not sure bragging about stopping $131M in illicit transfers quite lands when the whole point of this article is that you allegedly allowed 10x that.

Posted:

Bloomberg has filed their opposition to Justin Sun’s renewed motion for emergency relief, arguing they never promised not to publish the information he and his team provided to them. They also argue that his demands they remove the article about him and prevent them from publishing a second one would violate the First Amendment.

Sun cannot satisfy the requirements for emergency relief: (1) He has no likelihood of success on the merits because Bloomberg never made any promise to him inconsistent with what it published (promissory estoppel) and he has no claim for publication of truthful newsworthy information (public disclosure of private facts). (2) The pre-lawsuit publication of the information moots his irreparable harm allegations, which are in any event misleading and disproved by his own actions. (3) Any prohibition on publication, including a takedown of a report that already has been published, would irreparably harm Bloomberg’s First Amendment right to publish. (4) A prior restraint would thus disserve the public interest.

(Answering brief)

After publication, Sun asked Bloomberg to reduce his supposed ownership of TRX from 60 billion (~63% of circulating supply) to only 8 billion. Bloomberg refused. “[W]e believe Mr. Sun may not want the public to know that he controls a majority of the TRX in circulation”

(Maloney declaration)

Also: I seem to have become an exhibit

(Answering brief, exhibit 5 to Hentoff declaration)