Court filings by the US Attorney’s office related to former FTX Digital Markets CEO Ryan Salame reveal that the government discussed additional areas of potential criminal exposure with his lawyers including his alleged involvement in a bribery scheme in the Bahamas, “evidence of distribution quantities narcotics trafficking,” and “paying for prostitutes.”

This filing was one of several exhibits included with a memorandum in opposition to Salame’s previously withdrawn petition for a writ of error coram nobis. Salame had filed his motion to argue that the government had provided “assurance that it would not continue investigating Michelle Bond if Salame pleaded guilty,” and that her subsequent indictment meant that his conviction should be vacated.

Despite his attempt to withdraw the motion, Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered that “the parties shall file the papers” originally planned for that motion and appear for a hearing.

This memorandum is related to that order and contains notes of discussions between US prosecutors and the defense attorneys for Salame and Bond.

Read more: The First Step Act may not apply to SBF or Ryan Salame

Central dispute

Salame’s original motion and the assurance that the investigation into Bond would end if he agreed to plea guilty specifically claimed that “the government used the plea negotiations to threaten” Bond.

Salame’s filing further claims that “government lawyers conveyed that they would discontinue investigating Bond.”

When he withdrew the motion, it noted that “Salame stands by the facts set forth in the petition” that had previously been filed.

This new filing from the government challenges this argument from Salame. One exhibit contained the previously mentioned criminal exposure and also noted Assistant US Attorney Danielle Sassoon’s claim that “without making promises outside the four corners of the plea agreement, but as is often the practice here, if we do reach a resolution, we expect that we will conclude the aspects of our investigation that concern RS but not SBF.”

Contemporaneous notes from a May 2023 call with Bond and Salame’s lawyers include Sassoon noting, “explained that in light of their continued representation of Michelle, wanted to clarify that before continuing discussions about potential disposition for Ryan, make clear that view Ryan and Michelle as separate, resolution of his case will not bear on her case and investigation of her conduct.”

It further includes a notation that appears to show Jason Linder, one of the lawyers representing Bond and Salame acknowledging this.

“Understood. In Friday conversation after search warrant, thought you had said no promises outside plea agreement, but plea will generally resolve investigation into Ryan’s conduct that doesn’t involve Sam,” it read.

Sassoon further noted, “In light of that conversation, wanted to make very clear that we view discussions of Michelle/Ryan as separate, a Ryan disposition will not resolve investigation of Michelle’s conduct, and to extent anything previously said was understood otherwise, that is superseded by this call.”

Linder once again apparently expressed acknowledgment.

An additional set of notes from the US Attorney’s office related to an April 2024 call relate a dispute in which the lawyers representing Bond and Salame were “surprised and alarmed that investigation is still ongoing and almost at conclusion” and apparently further noted “office would conclude investigation into Ryan other than SBF stuff” and that this “meant would cease investigating” Bond.

Additionally, emails from June of this year from the law firm representing Bond and Salame claim that its notes from that call “do not reflect the statement that you recounted to us on our prior call, nor do they reflect the statement that you made below about a disposition with Mr. Salame not resolving the investigation of Ms. Bond’s conduct.”

Taken together, it seems that the government represented (at the minimum) that agreeing to this plea would end the investigation into Salame, other than into issues related to Bankman-Fried. Salame and Bond’s lawyers seem to have understood that an investigation into Bond’s alleged crimes (which involved Salame) would no longer be investigated.

There is another potential implication, highlighted by crypto researcher Molly White, namely that failure to adequately communicate these issues may have led to family decisions.

One of the exhibits that contains notes detailing a conversation between the lawyers includes the lawyers for Bond and Salame claiming that because of their belief that Bond would not be investigated, they “had a baby together.”

Salame announced that Bond had gotten divorced on the same day she was indicted.

Read more: Ryan Salame is whitewashing his role at FTX and Alameda

The additional allegations against Salame

One of the documents contains areas of other potential criminal behavior that the government considered charging Salame with.

These include that Salame was directly involved in a scheme to wash-trade to access frozen funds in China with accounts set up using the identities of “Thai prostitutes.” Caroline Ellison, the former CEO of Alameda Research, testified to this same scheme.

However, the document also noted that in April 2023, Sassoon believed there was “insufficient evidence that RS was aware of misreps to FTX customers, although that could change.”

This concession is somewhat attenuated by the note that they believed “RS knew FTX customer funds were commingled and AR was spending those funds.”