SBF wanted to advance a defense that he relied on his lawyers telling him that was kosher, which requires there to be enough evidence that his lawyers specifica

SBF wanted to advance a defense that he relied on his lawyers telling him that was kosher, which requires there to be enough evidence that his lawyers specifically told him it was kosher. The hearing was to determine if he would be allowed to raise that defense. You don't want the jury to be present because if you ultimately decide the evidence isn't admissible, you can't exactly tell the jury "please forget everything you just heard." At the end of the hearing, the defense attorney decided they weren't going to proceed with that defense, and instead go with the general defense of, uh, SBF thought the lawyers were telling him this was all kosher, so it can't be fraud. In any case, he is actually testifying in his defense in front of the jury today, and Monday, and likely Tuesday. Based on this hearing, when he goes into cross-examination, the prosecutor is going to open him up and completely eviscerate him, with SBF happily handing the prosecutor the surgical tools to do so.