Bankman-Fried Petitions Federal Court for Retrial in FTX Collapse Case
Share:
- Sam Bankman-Fried has filed a motion in federal court seeking a retrial on the grounds of the “bogus” FTX bankruptcy filing.
- Bankman-Fried believes that a retrial may alter the story around FTX’s insolvent status.
Sam Bankman-Fried has filed a motion seeking a retrial in his ongoing fraud and bankruptcy case against him in a New York federal court. Bankman-Fried filed the motion on February 5, 2026, wherein it was claimed that the bankruptcy was filed improperly due to other lawyers’ intervention. In the motion filed by Bankman-Fried, it was stated that the company was not really insolvent when the Chapter 11 filing was made against it by the lawyers who took over the company and filed a “bogus bankruptcy.”
He says that he never approved that filing on behalf of FTX. Bankman-Fried insists that inside data indicated there were adequate assets versus obligations at the time it collapsed. He also argues that, had the cash been appropriately managed, FTX. The US had enough cash to remain operational. Bankman-Fried says the exchange could have been sold to new investors instead of going into bankruptcy. The motion says the bankruptcy filing was for lawyers’ benefit, not customers or creditors. He has kept arguing that stealing customer money as generally charged had nothing to do with the insolvency.
Legal Motion Details and Support Claims
The retrial motion includes declarations from former FTX personnel in support of his claims about solvency. According to Bankman-Fried, the evidence provided by the testimony of these former executives contradicts the story told by the prosecution. The request is not related to the pending appeal of his case in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. This pending appeal, which took place last November 2025, is aimed at addressing evidentiary issues and supposed bias when the trial took place. The request was made under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The legal test for a motion filed under Rule 33 is extremely high, as was the case in the case of Bankman-Fried, who still remains in prison as he received a 25-year sentence for fraud and conspiracy charges against him. The retrial of the motions continues the legal debate on the underlying factual allegations of the case. The statements used in the case are intended to reflect the improper handling of the inclusion of assets by the bankruptcy legal team.
Look who has filed SBF's pro se motion for a new trial: Professor Barbara H. Fried of Stanford. Inner City Press story coming with 35 page motion https://t.co/ZTM8wTWnCY pic.twitter.com/bgIiEf5IZq
— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) February 10, 2026
Broader Context and Industry Reaction
The public utterances of Bankman-Fried on social media continue to emphasize that FTX never filed for bankruptcy on his watch. It has been emphasized that lawyers took control early on and filed for bankruptcy as if Bankman-Fried was unaware of the decision. Social media portrays the legal battle as being on center stage with regard to the retrial motion. Various arguments have criticized court filings, indicating that there was definitive insolvency when the company filed for it. The motion reignites arguments about what led to the collapse of the company towards the end of last year.
The retrial motion could revive debate over due process and evidentiary rulings. While others note that the motion emphasizes that the case has always had legal issues to be granted. Bankman-Fried is considered one of the biggest crypto fraud trials. His legal proceedings include a pending appeal, with the approval of the retrial remaining unclear due to legal criteria.
Highlighted Crypto News:
India’s Crypto Policy Under Scrutiny as Chadha Pushes for VDA Legal Recognition
Read More
Bitcoin’s long-term rally is ‘broken’ until it reclaims $85,000, Deribit executive says
Wall Street analysts cut Coinbase price targets following Q4 earnings miss
Bankman-Fried Petitions Federal Court for Retrial in FTX Collapse Case
Share:
- Sam Bankman-Fried has filed a motion in federal court seeking a retrial on the grounds of the “bogus” FTX bankruptcy filing.
- Bankman-Fried believes that a retrial may alter the story around FTX’s insolvent status.
Sam Bankman-Fried has filed a motion seeking a retrial in his ongoing fraud and bankruptcy case against him in a New York federal court. Bankman-Fried filed the motion on February 5, 2026, wherein it was claimed that the bankruptcy was filed improperly due to other lawyers’ intervention. In the motion filed by Bankman-Fried, it was stated that the company was not really insolvent when the Chapter 11 filing was made against it by the lawyers who took over the company and filed a “bogus bankruptcy.”
He says that he never approved that filing on behalf of FTX. Bankman-Fried insists that inside data indicated there were adequate assets versus obligations at the time it collapsed. He also argues that, had the cash been appropriately managed, FTX. The US had enough cash to remain operational. Bankman-Fried says the exchange could have been sold to new investors instead of going into bankruptcy. The motion says the bankruptcy filing was for lawyers’ benefit, not customers or creditors. He has kept arguing that stealing customer money as generally charged had nothing to do with the insolvency.
Legal Motion Details and Support Claims
The retrial motion includes declarations from former FTX personnel in support of his claims about solvency. According to Bankman-Fried, the evidence provided by the testimony of these former executives contradicts the story told by the prosecution. The request is not related to the pending appeal of his case in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. This pending appeal, which took place last November 2025, is aimed at addressing evidentiary issues and supposed bias when the trial took place. The request was made under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The legal test for a motion filed under Rule 33 is extremely high, as was the case in the case of Bankman-Fried, who still remains in prison as he received a 25-year sentence for fraud and conspiracy charges against him. The retrial of the motions continues the legal debate on the underlying factual allegations of the case. The statements used in the case are intended to reflect the improper handling of the inclusion of assets by the bankruptcy legal team.
Look who has filed SBF's pro se motion for a new trial: Professor Barbara H. Fried of Stanford. Inner City Press story coming with 35 page motion https://t.co/ZTM8wTWnCY pic.twitter.com/bgIiEf5IZq
— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) February 10, 2026
Broader Context and Industry Reaction
The public utterances of Bankman-Fried on social media continue to emphasize that FTX never filed for bankruptcy on his watch. It has been emphasized that lawyers took control early on and filed for bankruptcy as if Bankman-Fried was unaware of the decision. Social media portrays the legal battle as being on center stage with regard to the retrial motion. Various arguments have criticized court filings, indicating that there was definitive insolvency when the company filed for it. The motion reignites arguments about what led to the collapse of the company towards the end of last year.
The retrial motion could revive debate over due process and evidentiary rulings. While others note that the motion emphasizes that the case has always had legal issues to be granted. Bankman-Fried is considered one of the biggest crypto fraud trials. His legal proceedings include a pending appeal, with the approval of the retrial remaining unclear due to legal criteria.
Highlighted Crypto News:
India’s Crypto Policy Under Scrutiny as Chadha Pushes for VDA Legal Recognition
Read More
Bitcoin’s long-term rally is ‘broken’ until it reclaims $85,000, Deribit executive says