SBF’s lawyers move to block release of bail guarantors’ identities

The names of two guarantors who signed part of Sam Bankman-Fried's $250 million bail will remain secret for now.

A judge also rejected a settlement that would have allowed Bankman-Fried to use certain messaging apps.

Bankman Fried's attorneys filed a appeal to block the release of the names of the guarantors at the last minute on February 7. The appeal contained no further arguments against the disclosure, but will hold the order from being enforced until February 14 to allow for a further stay request.

The resource was expected after a January 30 ruling in which United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan granted a joint petition of eight major media outlets seeking to reveal the names of the guarantors.

Sam Bankman-Fried in an interview during the Bitcoin 2021 conference. Source: Cointelegraph

At the time, Kaplan noted that his order was likely to be appealed given the novelty of the circumstances.

He voiced the arguments of Bankman-Fried's lawyers that the guarantors would “face similar encroachments” as Bankman-Fried's parents lacked merit given the much smaller size of their individual bonds, at $200,000 and $500,000.

Bankman Fried's parents, Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, were the other two parties. who signed the bond.

In addition, the judge said that the guarantors had voluntarily signed individual bonds in a "highly publicized criminal proceeding" and thus opened themselves up to public scrutiny.

Related: US Attorney Requests SEC and CFTC Civil Cases Against SBF to Be Waited Until After Criminal Trial

Meanwhile, on February 7, Kaplan rejected a joint agreement between Bankman-Fried's legal team and prosecutors who reportedly changed bail conditions and allowed Bankman-Fried to use certain messaging apps.

Kaplan did not provide a reason for rejecting the motion, but added that the issue would be discussed further at a hearing on February 9.

Kaplan ruled on February 1 that Bankman-Fried was forbidden to contact Employees at FTX or Alameda Research cited a risk of "inappropriate contact with potential witnesses" after it was revealed that the former CEO had been contacting former and current staff.