Testifying on Day 2 and Day 3, Yedidia explained FTX's customer-deposit systems and said correcting a database bug still left Alameda owing approximately $8 billion. Cross-examination tested his immunity, limited financial responsibilities, role in creating the bug, and reliance on secondhand information concerning his resignation.
Day 2
Summary
Adam Yedidia described his close relationship and work history with Sam Bankman-Fried, his resignation after learning Alameda had used FTX customer deposits to repay creditors, his immunity concerns, and FTX's marketing, website, and shared Bahamas residence.
Highlights (4)
Day 3
Summary
Adam Yedidia explained how Alameda received and tracked FTX customer fiat deposits, testified that a corrected code bug revealed an approximately $8 billion liability, and described Bankman-Fried's knowledge, Signal auto-deletion policy, and response to concerns about the debt.
Highlights (7)
Show all 7 highlights
Summary
Yedidia's cross-examination explored his limited financial role, FTX's controls and growth, his immunity and government preparation, the fiat-account bug, the approximately $8 billion liability remaining after correction, and the secondhand information that prompted his resignation.
Highlights (6)
Show all 6 highlights
Summary
Yedidia distinguished knowing about Alameda's $8 billion liability from knowing customer funds had been spent, explained his "not bulletproof" interpretation and resignation, and addressed FTX spending, luxury housing, compensation, and the limits of his pre-November knowledge.
Highlights (4)
Day 10
Summary
Defense counsel tested Nishad Singh's memory and responsibility while examining the $8 billion fiat@ftx bug, Alameda's code privileges, backdated Serum payments, and the funding and approval of political donations.
Mentioned in this proceeding.
Day 14
Summary
Prosecutors challenged the legal-advice basis for Bankman-Fried's deleted Signal messages, North Dimension payment processing, Alameda's special account treatment, customer-fund borrowing, and loans, prompting repeated qualifications and judicial intervention.
Mentioned in this proceeding.
Day 15
Summary
Bankman-Fried denied fraud but admitted major risk-management failures, explained Alameda's borrowing and customer-deposit roles, described discovering the $8 billion fiat@FTX liability, and blamed unhedged market exposure for Alameda's deterioration.
Mentioned in this proceeding.
Day 16
Summary
Bankman-Fried described his October assessment of Alameda's liability and solvency, defended FTX's public assurances, and traced the withdrawal surge and asset crash that he said produced liquidity and solvency crises.
Mentioned in this proceeding.
Day 17
Summary
Prosecutors used emails, chats, balance sheets, and public statements to challenge Bankman-Fried's account of Alameda's use of customer deposits, his delayed inquiry into the fiat@ liability, preferential Bahamian withdrawals, and FTX's November liquidity assurances.
Mentioned in this proceeding.
Day 18
Summary
Nicolas Roos argued that Bankman-Fried knowingly used FTX customer assets through Alameda, concealed the resulting shortfall, misled customers, lenders, and investors, and was guilty on all seven charges.
Mentioned in this proceeding.
Summary
The defense argued that good-faith business mistakes, accounting and risk-management failures, and a liquidity crisis—not fraudulent intent—caused FTX's collapse, while challenging cooperating witnesses and seeking acquittal on all counts.
Mentioned in this proceeding.