Report: SBF Placed in Solitary Confinement Following Tucker Carlson Interview

A spokesperson for the U.S. Bureau of Prisons reportedly stated that Sam Bankman-Fried’s interview with Tucker Carlson was conducted without the agency’s approval.

Former FTX CEO Sam “SBF” Bankman-Fried has reportedly been placed in solitary confinement after participating in an interview with political commentator Tucker Carlson without authorization from prison officials.

A U.S. Bureau of Prisons representative told The New York Times on March 7 that the interview had not been approved.

Following the interview's publication, Bankman-Fried was allegedly moved to solitary confinement at Brooklyn’s Metropolitan Detention Center, where he has been detained since August 2023, according to a source familiar with the matter.

Source: Andre Cronje

The U.S. Bureau of Prisons reportedly enforces strict regulations on inmate communications, including who can contact them and the permitted methods of communication.

During his conversation with Carlson, Bankman-Fried discussed his experience in prison since his sentencing and shared his views on U.S. crypto regulations. He also stated that he did not consider himself “a criminal.”

Although Carlson did not explicitly ask whether Bankman-Fried expected a pardon from President Donald Trump, the former FTX CEO appeared open to certain Republican perspectives.

Following the interview's release, speculation within the community about a potential Trump pardon has intensified. According to a March 7 post by crypto predictions platform Polymarket, the odds of Bankman-Fried receiving a pardon have nearly doubled since the interview aired.

On January 21, just one day after taking office, President Trump issued a full pardon to Ross Ulbricht, who had spent 12 years in prison for creating the now-defunct darknet marketplace, Silk Road.

Meanwhile, in September 2024, Bankman-Fried’s legal team filed an appeal against his conviction on seven felony counts and his 25-year prison sentence.

In their 102-page appeal, his lawyers argued that Bankman-Fried was “never presumed innocent” and faced intense scrutiny that they claim influenced prosecutors, the presiding judge, and media coverage.