Mark S. Cohen

Served as defense trial counsel and handled witness examinations, evidentiary issues, the defendant's testimony, and the defense closing argument. His mapped examinations included cross-examination and recross of Zac Prince, resumed cross-examination of Nishad Singh, cross-examination of Can Sun, and portions of Samuel Bankman-Fried's direct and redirect examinations.

In one cross-examination, Cohen focused on the distinction between fungible dollars held in bank accounts and FTX's internal account records. He emphasized that customer and Alameda dollars were not labeled within shared accounts. When the prosecution objected to the form of a question characterizing the relationship between a bank account and a ledger adjustment, the court sustained the objection, and Cohen reformulated the question.

Across Days 14 through 17, Cohen conducted portions of Bankman-Fried's direct examination and resumed redirect examination. Those examinations placed the defendant's own testimony into the defense case before Cohen presented the defense closing on Day 18.

In closing, Cohen organized the evidence into a growth period from 2019 through 2021 and a stressed period from June through November 2022. He argued that the later crisis involved differing understandings of the fiat liability and Alameda's ability to meet obligations. He also challenged cooperating and immunized witnesses' accounts by addressing differences in timing, secondhand information, and plea, immunity, or sentencing incentives. Cohen connected the defense theory to good faith, fraudulent intent, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, unanimity, and the court's instructions, while emphasizing that the defense did not bear the burden of establishing innocence.