SBF's lawyer completed the closing argument and insisted on defending SBF not guilty.

SBF attorney Mark S. Cohen completed his closing arguments in court on Wednesday evening local time, seeking the court and jury to confirm that SBF had always acted in "good faith" when operating FTX and Alameda Research, and therefore could not be found guilty of fraud. Regarding the events and decisions that led to FTX's bankruptcy last November and the revelation that Alameda misappropriated billions of dollars in customer funds from the exchange, Cohen offered what he called an "alternative history" rather than the prosecutors' version. "Sam (SBF) went to great lengths to start and run two multi-billion dollar businesses in new markets," Cohen said in an emotional closing argument to jurors. "Some decisions turned out well and some decisions turned out badly. Oops." It also stated that it was "real-world miscommunication," "errors" and "delays" that caused damage to FTX and related companies, rather than intentional fraud. (CoinDesk) It was reported yesterday that in the SBF case in New York on November 1, prosecutors claimed in their closing arguments that they were guilty of fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud. Prosecutor Nicolas Roos pointed out: "This is fraud, plain and simple. Before FTX, there was Alameda." SBF faces seven counts of fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud and could face up to 115 years in prison if convicted. A decision in the case will be made by a 12-person jury in the coming days.