Judge Rules in Favor of Revealing the Names of SBF’s Bail Guarantors but, There’s a Catch

Sam Bankman-Fried’s bail guarantors have been ordered to reveal their identities. They aided SBF, the founder of the now-defunct cryptocurrency exchange FTX, with his $250 million bail bond. As a result of a recent decision by United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan, they might have their identities published next month.

According to the court filing on January 30, Lewis Kaplan has accepted a joint petition from eight media organizations, including Bloomberg, the Financial Times, and Reuters, who demanded the identification of the two people in charge of securing SBF’s $250 million bail bond in a letter to Kaplan on January 12. 

He requested that the two people’s names be made public “for the limited purpose of asserting the public’s claimed right of access” to the information.

Judge Kaplan stated that “the information at issue is entitled only to weak presumption of access, yet the countervailing factors are not sufficiently persuasive to overcome even that presumption.”

SBF’s Bail Guarantors Might Not be Revealed

Additionally, there is a chance that the names of the guarantors may not be revealed, as Kaplan has allowed the attorney to appeal to the ruling until February 7. The judge indicated that an “appeal is likely” and that he would extend the filing deadline to February 14 in order to allow for the submission of an application for an additional stay “if a notice of appeal from this order is filed by then.” 

However, Bankman-Fried’s attorneys have persisted in making the case that their identities should remain hidden because the FTX founder and those connected to him suffer grave security risks and his parents have already received threats.

According to Kaplan, Bankman Fried’s parents were subjected to great examination because of their close connection with him and the fact that his father worked at FTX for a year before the exchange’s demise. Kaplan further stated in his decision: 

“But it does not follow that the non-parental sureties would face similar threats and harassment.”