Sam Bankman-Fried has publicly challenged U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, alleging bias in his criminal trial while pursuing a new trial in federal court. The claims follow a recent pro se filing in the Southern District of New York and come amid broader attention to judicial recusal in other high-profile cases. His statements outline specific concerns about courtroom conduct and judicial remarks during proceedings that led to his conviction.
Sam Bankman-Fried Cites Courtroom Conduct and Pre-Verdict Remarks in Bias Claims
Sam Bankman-Fried stated that Judge Kaplan should step aside from his case. He pointed to alleged conduct during trial proceedings. According to his statement, the judge showed clear contempt toward him in front of the jury. He also claimed that this behavior influenced how the trial unfolded.
In addition, Sam Bankman-Fried referenced comments attributed to the judge before the verdict. He cited a remark suggesting there was sufficient evidence of fraud. He also alleged that the judge encouraged jurors to reach a quick verdict. The statement mentioned pizza and transportation offers during the event deliberations, which were completed within a limited time.
Sam Bankman-Fried faced a Trump pardon rejection and compared his case to developments in Delaware courts. He noted that a judge stepped aside from several cases following allegations of bias. He argued that similar standards should apply in his situation. As a result, he requested Judge Kaplan’s recusal from his case.
Filing for a New Trial Under Rule 33
Separately, Sam Bankman-Fried filed a motion seeking a new trial in New York federal court. The filing entered the docket on February 10, 2026. He submitted the motion without legal representation from prison. The submission included a memorandum of law, a declaration, and a dated cover letter.
The motion cites Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. This rule allows courts to grant a new trial if, in the interest of justice, they deem it necessary. In his filing, Sam Bankman-Fried argued that his trial violated due process standards. He claimed that the government withheld information that affected his defense.
At the same time, the filing remains separate from his appeal in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeal process continues independently of the Rule 33 motion. The court has not yet ruled on the new trial request.
Sam Bankman-Fried is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence. A jury ruled against him in November 2023 on seven counts. These involved fraud and conspiracy charges tied to the collapse of FTX, set to distribute $2.2B to customers starting today, 31st March. Prosecutors stated that the case involved defrauding customers, lenders, and investors.
Delaware Recusal Developments Add Context
The dispute emerges alongside a separate recusal situation in Delaware. Judge Kathaleen McCormick announced she would reassign several cases involving Elon Musk, which erupted as SpaceX considers dropping Robinhood’s IPO. The decision followed claims from Musk’s legal team regarding alleged bias.
The claims centered on a LinkedIn interaction. Attorneys argued that the judge supported a post referencing Musk’s defeat in a separate case. Judge McCormick denied endorsing the post.
Although she denied the allegations of bias, she sanctioned the withdrawal of the cases. She mentioned increased media coverage as one of the factors in her letter. She said that this attention was likely to interfere with the dispensation of justice. She was also confident that other judges could handle the issues.
Source: https://coingape.com/sam-bankman-fried-calls-out-judge-kaplan-over-alleged-bias-in-trial/
