Skip to content
Sam Bankman-Fried- Case Archive
personpersonShamel MedranoShamel MedranoInvestigative analyst with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.← All People
Witness· United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York

Shamel Medrano

Investigative analyst with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.

AppearedFederal Criminal Trial
127 lines·3 proceedings·1 mention

About

Called by the government on Day 11, Medrano described his work as an investigative analyst and explained his limited involvement in the case. He said that his role consisted of loading Twitter search-warrant returns and creating maps.

On direct examination, he explained features of Twitter records, including posts, mentions, reposts, likes, and private direct messages. He identified dates, account information, document types, signatures, and people appearing across social-media records, corporate name-change documents, a North Dimensions due-diligence questionnaire, and a photograph. The government also used his testimony with stipulated exhibits concerning a deleted tweet and private messages addressing ethics, public relations, regulators, company personnel, and customer deposits.

Cross-examination separated Medrano's ability to read and identify the displayed records from firsthand knowledge of their broader context. He acknowledged that prosecutors supplied the communications, that he did not select them, and that he did not know whether additional messages involving the same people existed. When the defense asked whether he could determine the conversation's tone, the court sustained the prosecution's objection.

Trial Record (3)

FederalFederal Criminal TrialOct 3, 2023 – Nov 2, 2023Called by prosecution

Called by the government on Day 11, Medrano identified and explained social-media and business records while limiting his case role to loading Twitter search-warrant returns and creating maps. Cross-examination focused on his lack of firsthand knowledge about the selection, completeness, and context of the communications.

Day 11

DirectShamel Medrano — DirectShamel MedranoDanielle R. Sassoon2highlights104lines spoken

Summary

Investigative analyst Shamel Medrano explained Twitter records and presented stipulated posts, direct messages, corporate documents, and deletion information tied to FTX, Alameda-affiliated entities, public representations, and private November 2022 communications.

Highlights (2)

testimony highlightMedrano described his investigative-analyst duties and limited his work in this case to loading Twitter search-warrant returns into an investigative database and creating maps.Open in transcript →
Quote“Initially, I loaded some Twitter search warrant returns into one of our investigative databases, and I also created some maps. Other than that, nothing else.”— Shamel MedranoMedrano expressly limited his involvement in the investigation, defining him as a records-presentation witness rather than a witness to the underlying business events.Open in transcript →
CrossShamel Medrano — CrossShamel MedranoChristian R. Everdell5highlights23lines spoken

Summary

Medrano acknowledged that prosecutors selected the Twitter messages he reviewed and that he lacked personal knowledge of their completeness, participants, relationships, and surrounding context.

Highlights (5)

admissionMedrano confirmed that prosecutors supplied the messages, that he did not select them, and that he did not know whether other messages involving the same people existed.Open in transcript →
Quote“Yes, the prosecutors showed me the messages.”— Shamel MedranoMedrano confirmed that the prosecution, rather than he, selected the communications he reviewed for testimony.Open in transcript →
testimony highlightMedrano acknowledged that he did not know the message participants, their relationships with Mr. Bankman-Fried, or the events preceding the conversations; he knew only what he saw in the selected material.Open in transcript →
Quote“No. I only know what I was seeing, correct.”— Shamel MedranoThe answer captured Medrano's limited knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the selected messages.Open in transcript →
Show all 5 highlights
rulingThe court sustained the prosecution's objection when the defense asked whether Medrano could determine the conversation's tone from the messages.Open in transcript →