🚀 Gate Square “Gate Fun Token Challenge” is Live!
Create tokens, engage, and earn — including trading fee rebates, graduation bonuses, and a $1,000 prize pool!
Join Now 👉 https://www.gate.com/campaigns/3145
💡 How to Participate:
1️⃣ Create Tokens: One-click token launch in [Square - Post]. Promote, grow your community, and earn rewards.
2️⃣ Engage: Post, like, comment, and share in token community to earn!
📦 Rewards Overview:
Creator Graduation Bonus: 50 GT
Trading Fee Rebate: The more trades, the more you earn
Token Creator Pool: Up to $50 USDT per user + $5 USDT for the first 50 launche
SBF's legal team will argue in the appeal trial that SBF was "presumed guilty" following the collapse of FTX.
PANews, November 4 - According to Bloomberg, FTX co-founder SBF (Sam Bankman-Fried) on Tuesday sought to overturn his fraud conviction and 25-year prison sentence in an appeals court. His lawyer stated that after the 2022 collapse of the cryptocurrency exchange, media, prosecutors, and others sought to bring him down, and Judge Lewis Kaplan rushed to convict him, claiming that SBF was “presumed guilty even before being charged.” In the appeal brief, the lawyer focused on the 80-year-old Judge Kaplan, accusing him of “favoring the government multiple times and obstructing the defense,” and called for a retrial with a different judge. SBF's team argued that the judge pressured the jurors by suggesting they could work overtime, providing free dinners, and offering rides home, while also constantly ridiculing SBF and questioning his testimony. SBF, who is currently serving time in California, is expected not to attend the hearing. In addition, according to a source familiar with the matter earlier this year, SBF's parents have been exploring ways to obtain a pardon from President Trump. On Tuesday, attorney Shapiro also expected to argue that the judge wrongly prevented SBF from informing the jury about FTX's solvency, while allowing the prosecution to accuse him of embezzlement leading to bankruptcy. The SBF team emphasized that he had no intention to deceive clients and that the judge should have allowed him to testify that he had always acted according to the advice of FTX's lawyers.