Former FTX chief executive Sam Bankman-Fried has petitioned a federal court for a new trial on fraud charges, arguing that previously unavailable witness testimony could materially weaken the government’s case. The motion, filed on February 5 in Manhattan federal court, challenges his 2023 conviction that resulted in a 25-year prison sentence. The request is separate from Bankman-Fried’s ongoing appeal and faces a high legal threshold, with new trials granted only in limited circumstances.
The filing was submitted on Bankman-Fried’s behalf by his mother, Barbara Fried, a retired Stanford Law School professor. Courts generally require that new evidence be both unavailable at the time of trial and likely to produce a different outcome. Legal analysts cited by Bloomberg have described the effort as a long shot, though it keeps pressure on the conviction as appeals proceed.
Witness Testimony and Judicial Conduct
Bankman-Fried’s motion centers on potential testimony from former FTX executives Daniel Chapsky and Ryan Salame, neither of whom testified at trial. The defense argues that their accounts could challenge the prosecution’s portrayal of FTX’s financial condition prior to its November 2022 collapse. Prosecutors had argued that customer funds were systematically misused to support affiliated trading firm Alameda Research.
Salame previously pleaded guilty to campaign finance and fraud-related charges and is serving a seven-and-a-half-year prison sentence. Bankman-Fried contends that the absence of this testimony limited the jury’s understanding of internal decision-making at FTX. The motion also asks that a different judge review the request, alleging that trial judge Lewis Kaplan displayed prejudice that constrained the defense’s case.
These arguments mirror claims raised during Bankman-Fried’s appeal, including assertions that the court improperly restricted evidence suggesting sufficient assets existed to repay customers. Kaplan has previously rejected those claims, stating that the proposed evidence did not negate fraudulent intent.
Broader Industry and Institutional Context
The renewed legal maneuver comes as the crypto industry continues to grapple with the institutional fallout from FTX’s collapse, one of the most consequential failures in digital asset history. The case accelerated regulatory scrutiny globally, reshaped risk assessments among institutional investors, and contributed to tighter controls at exchanges and trading firms.
Meanwhile, the FTX bankruptcy estate has made progress in returning funds to creditors. Court-appointed administrators distributed billions of dollars in 2025 through a phased repayment process, with further payouts expected as asset recoveries continue. Those efforts have partially restored confidence among affected customers, even as legal proceedings against former executives remain active.
For regulators and market participants, Bankman-Fried’s motion underscores the prolonged legal aftershocks of the FTX failure. While unlikely to succeed, the bid for a new trial highlights how high-profile enforcement cases can remain contested years after a verdict, influencing perceptions of accountability and governance across the digital asset sector.
