FTX founder convicted of 7 counts of fraud, potentially facing a maximum sentence of 115 years.

On the first anniversary of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange collapse, its founder has been found guilty by a jury of 7 counts of fraud. If convicted, he faces a maximum sentence of 115 years. Sentencing is expected to be handed down on March 28, 2024. Although the defendant has the right to appeal, the evidence presented during the month-long trial appears to be quite unfavorable for him.

One of the largest financial fraud cases in American history ###

This week, the founder of FTX completed a four-day testimony. After 3 PM Eastern Time on Thursday, the 12 jurors began deliberations. The jury is composed of 9 women and 3 men, ranging in age from 33 to 69, with diverse professional backgrounds. They must reach a unanimous decision on all 7 charges to render a verdict.

Surprisingly, the jury reached a unanimous verdict in less than 5 hours, finding the defendant guilty of all 7 counts of fraud charged. Around 7:40 PM that evening, the judge announced that a verdict had been reached. In a packed courtroom, the guilty verdict was read, including wire fraud and conspiracy against FTX customers and Alameda lenders, conspiracy to commit securities fraud against FTX investors, conspiracy to commit commodity fraud against FTX customers, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. According to information from the U.S. Department of Justice, the maximum sentence for each charge ranges from 5 to 20 years.

If all charges are established, the defendant faces a maximum prison sentence of 115 years. The prosecution claims this is "one of the largest financial fraud cases in American history." Judge Lewis Kaplan has tentatively set the sentencing date for March 28, 2024.

Given that the defense attorney has repeatedly opposed Kaplan's ruling before and after the trial, it is expected that the defense will appeal the judgment.

The defendant's "laid-back" testimony has sparked controversy.

Over the past four days, the content the defendant used to defend himself often felt "shameless" or "speechless."

The prosecution pointed out in its closing statement that the defendant intentionally conspired to defraud FTX's customers, lenders, and investors, instructing the transfer of customer funds to the affiliated hedge fund Alameda Research for venture capital, political donations, and expensive real estate.

The defense claims that the defendant made mistakes, but the actions were taken in "good faith." Defense attorney Mark S. Cohen stated that the defendant made every effort to establish and operate two billion-dollar companies in the new market. Some decisions turned out well, while others were disastrous. Cohen urged the jury to find that the defendant acted in "good faith" while managing FTX and Alameda Research, and therefore should not be convicted of fraud.

The defendant frequently used phrases like "I don't remember" in his statement, attempting to shift the blame onto others. The judge scolded him more than once and reminded him to answer the questions posed.

Faced with such a cunning "debater", the prosecution's questioning was exceptionally difficult, having to repeatedly present evidence such as media reports, videos, and the defendant's social media statements.

For the defendant, such "playing dead" by not admitting the facts in his testimony is a worthwhile "gamble." As long as he can convince one jury member of his words, everything is worth it. But in the end, things went contrary to his wishes. Because his former business partners had already pleaded guilty and testified against him. No amount of explanation seems to help.

Sequoia Capital partner Alfred Lin issued a statement on social media expressing his agreement with the conviction of the defendant and his relief over the outcome. He believes that this ruling confirms some facts that the public has long been aware of, that the defendant misled and deceived many, including clients, employees, business partners, and investors, including himself and Sequoia Capital.

The jury's verdict marks an important step in the trial of this case. Based on the lengthy month-long proceedings, the final sentencing outcome is likely to not disappoint those who are following the case.