Advertise
- Zafar Naik
Zafar Naik
- Reviewed by:
Sohrab KhawasSohrab is a passionate cryptocurrency news writer with over five years of experience covering the industry. He keeps a keen interest in blockchain technology and its potential to revolutionize finance. Whether he's trading or writing, Sohrab always keeps his finger on the pulse of the crypto world, using his expertise to deliver informative and engaging articles that educate and inspire. When he's not analyzing the markets, Sohrab indulges in his hobbies of graphic design, minimal design or listening to his favorite hip-hop tunes.
- Feb 11, 2026 11:04 UTC
-
SBF Demands New Trial, Claims Biden’s DOJ Silenced Key FTX Witnesses
SBF files a Rule 33 motion seeking a new trial in the FTX case.
He alleges Biden’s DOJ silenced or pressured key defense witnesses.
The filing escalates his broader challenge to the legitimacy of his conviction.
Sam Bankman-Fried has filed a motion for a new trial, claiming that Biden’s Department of Justice threatened witnesses into staying silent or changing what they told the court. He announced the filing on X today.
“New evidence shows that Biden’s DOJ threatened multiple witnesses into silence or into changing their testimony. My conviction should be thrown out,” SBF wrote.
The motion was filed under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure on February 10. It includes a sworn declaration from Daniel Chapsky, a former FTX insider who never testified at trial.
What the ‘Silenced’ Witnesses Would Have Said
SBF’s filing names three people he says the DOJ kept from helping his defense: Daniel Chapsky, Ryan Salame, and Nishad Singh.
According to the filing, Chapsky would have told the court that FTX was solvent during its November 2022 liquidity crisis and that customers could be repaid. He also claims Alameda Research’s account on FTX held a net positive balance in the billions throughout 2022.
The filing goes further. It alleges FTX’s bankruptcy estate deliberately manipulated financial data to back the prosecution’s case. It also claims the government “fundamentally misrepresented” what the negative balances in the fiat@ftx.com ledger actually meant.
For Salame and Singh, SBF says the DOJ used threats to block favorable testimony. Singh’s early statements to prosecutors allegedly shifted after pressure, while Salame never took the stand at all.
SBF Wants Judge Kaplan Off the Case
SBF is also calling for Judge Lewis Kaplan to recuse himself from ruling on the motion. He pointed to what he called a “pattern of prejudging defendants,” naming himself, Salame, and President Donald Trump as examples.
Community Remains Divided
Reactions on X were split.
Many dismissed the motion, pointing to the billions lost by FTX users and calling the filing a desperate move. Others saw it differently, with one user calling the Chapsky evidence “eye-opening” and framing the case as a broader failure of judicial fairness.
SBF’s Legal Push Follows Days of Public Claims
This filing comes after a week of posts where SBF accused lawyers of forcing the FTX bankruptcy and claimed prosecutors hid evidence that could have helped his case.
SBF is serving a 25-year sentence after being convicted on seven federal fraud charges tied to FTX’s $8 billion collapse.
Never Miss a Beat in the Crypto World!
Stay ahead with breaking news, expert analysis, and real-time updates on the latest trends in Bitcoin, altcoins, DeFi, NFTs, and more.
FAQs
SBF claims Biden’s DOJ threatened witnesses into silence or changing testimony, blocking evidence that could have helped his defense.
It’s uncertain. Courts carefully review Rule 33 motions, and SBF’s filing faces high legal scrutiny before any decision.
Reactions are mixed. Some see SBF’s motion as a desperate move, while others view the evidence as raising questions about trial fairness.
Trust with CoinPedia:
CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.
Investment Disclaimer:
All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.
Sponsored and Advertisements:
Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.
Yes 
No 
