The way to prepare from a repeat of today is to be ready to answer questions in a straightforward manner. Doubt that he’s got that in him.
The article was witty and vicious. I therefore enjoyed it immensely. I wonder if SBF is going to reconsider testifying after it - because as portrayed, he’s going to look TERRIBLE out there.
I was thinking the same thing. I bet they are taking all of the time that they can to coach him a bit but they don’t have much time because he’s behind bars at the moment. The judge will have a say in what goes on tomorrow as far as what subjects can examined.
One thing I noted that got multiple mentions in the article, was that SBF’s parents, who are knowledgeable professionals sure seemed to realize he was cooked. SBF just got a taste of how bad it could be, and if his lawyers can’t talk him out of it, his parents may. Just maybe.
Of course, since I learned (in this thread) that they themselves are at risk in these cases, they’d have another good reason to persuade him.
Both are Stanford law school professors. One an expert on tax law and the other an expert on legal ethics. It’s hilarious.
I picture a “Very moving after court special episode.”
Dad and Mom walk in, speaking to their son who’s sitting in a secure room:
Son, in every grown-up manchild’s life, there comes a time where his father has to sit him down and explain some uncomfortable truths about how life works. It’ll be embarrassing, but I want you to listen and reflect on what I’m going to say, because it may decided the rest of your life. You might find it “icky,” or “silly,” or “it can’t or won’t happen to me,” but I promise it will.
Son, you’re a whack-doodle. Everyone knows it, I do, your mother does, your ex-girlfriend does, and your lawyers know as well. Now, there’s nothing wrong with that. You can be proud! Many gamers, sportos, motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, wastoids, dweebies, dickheads are whack-doodles too, and it’s not shameful to be one.
But, it’s one thing to live your life as a whack-doodle. It’s another to be one in court, when you’re coming in against a mountain of evidence and cooperating witnesses. That prosecutor? They saw you’re a whack-doodle, and then proceeded to drink your milkshake like an oil baron.
Now Son, I’m going to love you whack-doodle or not, and so does your mom. Never doubt that. But if you go into court tomorrow and go on the stand, they will eat you alive like you were a free buffet at the community college. Each moment will be worse than the last, until you’re left a bleeding husk, hollowed out from the inside and lit on fire like a Halloween Pumpkin.
Son, it’s been hard to listen to this, and I’m proud of you. This time we can’t save you. We may not be able to save ourselves. But I want you to put on your big-boy pants and man up! Don’t get on that stand tomorrow. Don’t let them make you ashamed of what you are, a whining little man-baby of a financial criminal! Just say the magic words, “I’m a whack-doodle and that’s okay, and because of that, I’m following the advice of counsel and refusing to testify.”
Mom and Dad are in it up to their necks.
Dad was an insider in FTX’s damage control chat groups. A lot of the embezzlement was funneled through Mom’s PAC to secure political allies.
It’ll be a miracle if they can avoid criminal entanglement in this.
“Tell us the one about the Meritocracy again, grandma!”
(finally finds his pencil) : “Sir can you repeat that?”
CNN has pretty good updates. So far he’s been answering softballs from his attorney. Basically “I made mistakes but didn’t defraud anyone”.
We’ll see how that holds up when the cross-examination unsheathes its claws.
Reading the CNN article on his testimony, apparently he’s claiming ignorance.
Bankman-Fried testified Friday that he knew “basically nothing” about crypto before starting Alameda Research.
“I had absolutely no idea how they worked…I just knew they were things you could trade.”
When asked by his defense counsel why he founded Alameda Research in the fall of 2017, he said that at the time, “there was a ton of excitement, a ton of demand…” but not a lot of infrastructure for large trading firms.
It’s going to be epic. I suspect that won’t happen today though.
So, “Don’t blame the player, blame the game.”
Sorry, I’m no righteous dude. Of course, neither is SFB.
Somehow, I don’t think that’s going to be effective. Letting your lawyers make the case that you were technically ignorant and the other parties took advantage of you is possibly a workable tactic. Testifying yourself about it miiiiiight work if you looked sufficiently pathetic, innocent, remorseful, and/or had the charisma to pull it off.
SBF might pull off “pathetic” from my list above, but I don’t think he manages any of the rest.
Quoting the amusing Salon article cited above about the pre-jury testimonial review:
Defense lawyer Mark Cohen did his best. Unfortunately for him, the cross-examination was conducted by Sassoon, who looks like someone who uses “summer” as a verb, and often appears deceptively timid, with her hands held close to her chest. In her cross, she simply unhinged her jaw and ate Bankman-Fried.
Claws would be a mercy comparatively. Again, she’s going to eat him ALIVE.
That Salon article is fantastic. Just poetry.
The friendly questioning is over. The real fun starts first thing on Monday when he will presumably be ripped to shreds by the prosecution. The prosecution plans to have a rebuttal witness for a brief rebuttal but no word on who that will be yet.
His story reminds me of Elizabeth Holmes from Theranos. Both were portrayed as geniuses, interviewed extensively on TV and in print media, on magazine covers and each worth billions (on paper, at least). But then when their company fell apart, they each claimed to be the victim of others who were really responsible for the crimes.
It would be hilarious if the prosecution pulled a Sideshow Bob and just continually insinuated how pathetic and stupid he must have been until he bursts out in anger and brags about how he was the secret mastermind the entire time and how they’re all fools for not having seen it.
Direct from SBF’s attorney is over. Cross is next and that’s when the fun begins.
The prosecution team has had days to whet their knives, and I suspect the direct testimony has given them some damn fine whetstones.