- U.S. Grand Jury accuses FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried of misappropriating $100 million.
- Bankman-Fried allegedly used client assets for personal gain and political contributions.
- The U.S. Department of Justice charges SBF with wire fraud conspiracy.
On Monday, the U.S. Grand Jury issued a revised indictment against Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the embattled founder of the insolvent cryptocurrency exchange FTX. The indictment included allegations that he misappropriated over $100 million in client assets for political purposes.
Eleanor Terrett, a journalist from Fox Business, utilized platform X to disseminate the latest updates to the cryptocurrency sector.
As per the legal documentation, the U.S Criminal Division has leveled 15 serious accusations against SBF, leading to the filing of seven distinct charges against him.
The Grand Jury contended that SBF deliberately utilized the capital of FTX investors and clients for personal gain. They also alleged that he funded contributions to American political parties to sway cryptocurrency regulatory decisions.
Significantly, the Grand Jury underscored that SBF misled clients attempting to withdraw their assets from FTX. This was achieved by inaccurately asserting that clients’ assets were secure amidst the progression towards the exchange’s insolvency.
The U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division is also levying charges against SBF for alleged involvement in a wire fraud conspiracy. The announcement partially stated:
The defendant, and others known and unknown, knowingly having devised and intending to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud, and for obtaining money and property by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises..
Significantly, the seven-count indictment against Bankman-Fried follows the U.S. court’s decision to rescind his bail, resulting in his incarceration last week. The court took this action after allegations surfaced that SBF had disclosed confidential discussions involving his ex-business associate, Caroline Ellison, to The New York Times. In response, his legal representative has challenged the court’s ruling.
