SBF Lawsuit: Investors and Key Witnesses to Attend Court Hearing, Judge Prohibits Blaming Former Legal Counsel

FTX founder SBF is facing a court hearing for deliberately leaking the diary of former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison. He has since been reported to be attempting to shift the blame to a former legal advisor, but both tactics have been noted by federal prosecutors and the presiding judge.

Investors, Whistleblowers to Attend SBF Hearing

The U.S. Department of Justice has written to the presiding judge of the FTX case, Lewis Kaplan, requesting the summons of FTX users, employees, and investors to appear at the SBF hearing.

According to legal documents, users and investors will testify about their significant assets being deposited into FTX and their expectations from FTX.

Former employees turned whistleblowers will speak about their daily interactions with SBF, as well as their understanding of SBF's testimony, behavior, and intentions.

FTX executives who have already turned whistleblowers include:

• FTX Director of Engineering Nishad Singh

• FTX Co-founder and CTO Gary Wang

• Former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison

Ryan Salame, former CEO of FTX Digital Markets FTX Bahamas entity who pleaded guilty in early September, has not turned whistleblower and there is no news of his appearance in court.

SBF Prohibited from Blaming Former Legal Counsel

According to another legal document, presiding judge Lewis Kaplan has ruled that the SBF defense cannot bring up any arguments related to "reliance on advice of counsel," as he believes such arguments could unduly influence the jury early in the trial.

Lewis Kaplan stated:

Given the circumstances, it is apparent that focusing on the involvement of FTX and Alameda attorneys could lead to confusion, bias, and other risks. We request that the defendant exclude arguments based on former attorneys' advice not provided as "formal legal advice."

Lewis Kaplan also emphasized that in many cases, using past legal advice as evidence and defense is often inaccurate. He believes this could confuse the jury about whether the defendant truly had fraudulent intent.