A Car Crashed Into the Barricade of SBF’s Current Home, Lawyers Said

The lawyers of Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) цлаимед that three men drove their vehicle into a metal barricade outside his parents’ house in California. 

The family of FTX’s former CEO recently admitted becoming a target of “intense media scrutiny, harassment,” and even physical threats.

The Security Incident

The gigantic crash of FTX caused multi-billion investor losses and turned SBF into one of the most infamous figures in the cryptocurrency space. The US authorities accused the 30-year-old of being the main culprit behind the collapse, committing several crimes such as money laundering and fraud.

Somewhat expectedly, the wave of criticism spread across affected investors, many of whom also blamed him for the event.

His attorneys recently revealed that three individuals crashed their car into the barricade of his current home and told a security officer:

“You won’t be able to keep us out.”

Then they got back in the vehicle and drove away without being recognized. The man guarding the home in Palo Alto could not record the car’s license plate.

The incident happened nearly a month after a New York federal judge allowed SBF to live at his parents’ house on a record $250 million bond. Prior to that, he spent a week in the Bahamian Fox Hill Prison, while the trial on October 2, 2023, will rule whether he played a role in the FTX demise and determine his final sentence. 

The lawyers disclosed earlier this month that his mother – Barbara Fried – and father – Joseph Bankman – have received “a steady stream of threatening correspondence, including communications expressing a desire that they suffer physical harm.” 

Who Allowed the Bond?

The $250 million bond that enabled SBF to await his trial at his parents’ house sparked significant controversy in the crypto community. As such, leading media outlets, including Bloomberg, CNBC, The Financial Times, The Washington Post, and others, urged the judge overseeing the case to reveal the names of the people who allowed it.

SBF’s lawyers declined to provide details on the request, explaining there was a high chance those sureties suffer similar harassment like Ms. Fried and Mr. Bankman should their profiles become publicly known: 

“Given the notoriety of this case and the extraordinary media attention it is receiving, it is reasonable to assume that the non-parent sureties will face significant privacy and safety concerns if their identities are disclosed.”

Prosecutors have not yet taken any steps to honor the appeal of the media outlets.