SBF's Retrial Motion Rejected, Ryan Salame Named as Prosecutors' Key Counterpoint

Sam Bankman-Fried’s bid for a fresh trial has hit a significant roadblock. Federal prosecutors filed their opposition this week, dismantling the FTX founder’s arguments point by point and making clear that his conviction from 2023 stands firm. With this latest filing, the legal path forward for the imprisoned entrepreneur has narrowed considerably.

The Ryan Salame Testimony Defense Crumbles

The centerpiece of Bankman-Fried’s retrial request hinged on the availability of two former FTX executives: Daniel Chapsky and Ryan Salame. In his February filing, SBF argued that their testimony could have altered the trial’s outcome. However, prosecutors flatly rejected this reasoning.

According to the government’s response, both men were well within the defense team’s reach before the trial commenced. Ryan Salame, alongside Chapsky, had been fully known to the defense prior to proceedings, making their post-trial statements irrelevant to claims of newly discovered evidence. The prosecution emphasized that Bankman-Fried’s legal team made a strategic decision not to include Ryan Salame or Chapsky on their witness list at the time. Prosecutors stated: “The defense’s decision not to put the witnesses on his witness list or compel their testimony forecloses any claim that their post-trial views are newly discovered.” This argument effectively eliminated what had been positioned as a cornerstone of the retrial motion.

The Political Persecution Claim Falls Apart

Bankman-Fried’s secondary argument attempted to portray his prosecution as evidence of Biden-era Department of Justice overreach. Prosecutors labeled this contention as “incoherent” and “fanciful.” Their rebuttal pointed to inconvenient facts: SBF ranked among the largest Democratic Party donors in both 2020 and 2022. More significantly, his criminal conduct—campaign finance violations—traced directly back to those very donations.

This contradiction undermined any narrative of selective or politically motivated prosecution. The government’s emphasis on the donation connection demonstrated that the charges stemmed from concrete criminal activity, not partisan targeting.

What Lies Ahead

Bankman-Fried currently serves a 25-year sentence at a federal correctional facility in California. His pending appeal before the Second Circuit Court remains in limbo, though judicial skepticism emerged when oral arguments occurred last November. Judge Lewis Kaplan has not yet ruled on the retrial motion itself.

The broader case surroundings continue to shift. Caroline Ellison, the former Alameda Research CEO and key prosecution witness, was released after serving 440 days in custody. A presidential pardon, once potentially within reach given changing political winds, has been effectively ruled out by the White House.

For Bankman-Fried, the rejection of his retrial arguments represents another significant legal setback. With prosecutors systematically dismantling each component of his case—from the Ryan Salame witness claim to the political persecution narrative—the prospects for meaningful relief through the courts appear increasingly distant.