Civil proceedings against Sam Bankman-Fried from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities Exchange Commission have been postponed until after the FTX founder’s criminal trial in October. This decision was made by a New York judge who agreed to a request by prosecutors to postpone the process.

On February 13, 2019, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York Kevin Castel granted the motions to stay the civil proceeding “without prejudice.” This means that cases will now be halted until the criminal trial conducted by the Department of Justice has concluded.

The request to delay both civil lawsuits against the founder and former CEO of FTX was first filed on February 7 by Damian Williams, who serves as the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The request was made at the filing.

Williams stressed that providing the same evidence against Bankman-Fried will likely be the deciding factor in all three cases, and that the Justice Department’s October trial will have a “significant impact” on these civil cases. Williams cited these reasons as the reason he wanted the delay.

He also suggested that failing to delay the cases could give SBF unfair advantages in the DOJ trial, as the FTX founder had the tools to “inappropriately obtain prosecution material regarding government witnesses, circumvent the rules of criminal discovery and improperly tailoring his defense in the case”. criminal case.” If the cases were not delayed, he said, the Justice Department trial would proceed.

William’s request to postpone proceedings met with no opposition from the legal team representing Bankman-Fried.

As a court development related to SBF’s alleged witness tampering antics, on February 9 Judge Lewis Kaplan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York extended the FTX founder’s ban on using any app. of encrypted messaging until February 21 as a condition of his bail. This was part of the bail conditions that he had to meet.

A week earlier, SBF’s legal team had negotiated a deal to use certain encrypted apps under strict supervision. However, Judge Kaplan struck down the deal, suggesting that he was more concerned with shutting down any encrypted communication than offering SBF a little comfort. This led SBF’s legal team to believe that the judge was more concerned with shutting down any encrypted communication than offering SBF a little convenience.