• The New York Times (NYT) is asking the court to lift a gag order limiting the statements that former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried can make to the press.
• This comes after the NYT published a story on Bankman-Fried’s close associate, Caroline Ellison, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) sent a letter to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan accusing Bankman-Fried of witness tampering.
• The NYT’s senior vice president and deputy general counsel David McCraw has asked Judge Kaplan to reconsider the gag order, citing the public’s legitimate interest in knowing about Ellison and her activities at her cryptocurrency trading firm.
Fight DOJ’s Attempt To Stop Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried From Talking To The Press
The New York Times (NYT) is asking the court to lift a gag order limiting the statements that former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried can make to the press after publishing private writings of his close associate, Caroline Ellison. After publishing this story, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) sent a letter accusing Bankman-Fried of witness tampering as Ellison is poised to give her testimony in an ongoing case against him.
Original Gag Order
On July 26th, the court issued a temporary order prohibiting all parties from discussing with media anything about this ongoing case against Bankman-Fried and his attorneys from making “prejudicial extrajudicial statements”.
NYT’s Request
In response to this, The New York Times senior vice president and deputy general counsel David McCraw has asked Judge Lewis A. Kaplan to reconsider this gag order that restricts freedom of speech for those accused by citing public’s legitimate interest in knowing about Caroline Ellison and her activities at her cryptocurrency trading firm which defrauded investors billions of dollars without being detected by law enforcement agencies until it was too late for them.
First Amendment Rights
McGraw argues that any such restrictions should be imposed only as allowed by First Amendment rights and Rule 23 1(a) & ( h). He believes news organizations have every right seek details related this fallen crypto empire which involves one of its major players – Caroline Ellison – because it affects many innocent people who lost their hard earned money through fraud schemes undetected by government regulators until it was too late for them .
Conclusion
While both parties may choose not speak publicly about their case anymore, McGraw still asks that any restraints be kept within limits set by First Amendment rights so those accused will still have ability express themselves freely without fear repercussions or censorship from government authorities which could lead more wrongful convictions based on lack clear evidence or testimonies due restrictions imposed on defendants or witnesses who are unable tell their side story due fear these unfair rules or laws used oppress certain individuals .