Originally published at: Bankman-Fried to take the stand
…
4 Likes
No worries. Sammy clearly is the smartest guy in the room.
7 Likes
Since I’m not his lawyer, I am perfectly ok with this decision.
9 Likes
Putting your client on the stand so that he can say all the things that you specifically decided not to make part of his defense doesn’t sound like a genius move to me, but I am not a lawyer.
As I understand it, you put your client on the stand when (a) you trust them to stick to the script, and (b) you expect them to appear likable and trustworthy to the jury.
I don’t think Sam Bankman-Fried is someone who sticks to the script.
4 Likes
I don’t think it’s a bad idea at all. I mean, I think the guy should do time.
6 Likes
We’ll see if they’ll buy Studiously Schlubby Sam’s claim of being a paragon of Effective Altruism when he’s sporting a suit and (from what I’ve read) a haircut from a fellow inmate. Maybe the wunderkind will ask that the court allow him to give his testimony from a beanbag chair while he plays a video game to balance things out.
I suspect his lawyers know he’s already screwed. All of his former associates’ testimony made it clear that he was a grifter trying to cover up his crimes in any way possible, and running his mouth off in the press and trying to tamper with witnesses didn’t help. If he wants to try one more encore of his disheveled genius act before the curtain comes crashing down on his head, they’ll do what he asks as long as his mommy and daddy keep paying the bills.
4 Likes
2 Likes
Lawyer Wife works in securities and has been following this case pretty closely. She sent me a text saying he was going to take the stand with “Pop me some fucking popcorn.”
9 Likes
I would be surprised if his lawyers didn’t advise him to not take the stand. Ultimately, it’s the client’s decision.
ETA: To be clear, this is a criminal case. He has a Constitutional right to testify if he wants to. His lawyers cannot stop him.
7 Likes
One of my law school professors is a sitting US District Court judge, and he was telling us about a defendant recently who had already fired his attorney twice (public defenders, no less), and then tried to fire the third one. The judge told him “I don’t know what courtroom you’ve been sitting in, but your lawyer is doing an amazing job. You either stick with him, or go pro se.” He decided to stick with his lawyer. But…he then insisted on testifying, against the advice of counsel, and both the judge and the prosecutor sat down with him and explained all the things that could go wrong if he testified, like opening yourself up to more criminal charges if you end up admitting to other crimes. He still insisted on testifying, and apparently the testimony was just wild. Like…probably mostly true, but wild. Needless to say, he did not help himself and did not endear himself to the jury.
6 Likes
Some puppies will chew up your shoes and poop on the rug, some puppies will lose a few billion dollars of other people’s money gambling with crypto and buying mansions in the Bahamas. Adorable little scamps!
5 Likes
Has he been to the vet yet?
1 Like
He will self destruct and it will have been his parents’ idea all along.
1 Like
I kinda get that - I’ve never been on the business end of a matter before the court [1], so it took me a long time to learn how the courts work [2].
Most important bit I learned: the words “adversarial system” mean exactly what they say.
[1] (does all the superstitious rituals)
[2] I learned mostly through watching a naive friend ignore their first lawyer’s advice and call a crazy relative’s bluff about going to court. The advice: “Do not take this matter to court - it does not end well for anyone. Swallow your pride and solve this however you can out of court.” God help me, I believed that since they were in the right, court should be a simple matter. They switched lawyers, went to court, and regretted it ever since. Also learned: when someone who bills a lot of money in six-minute increments says “back out and don’t use my services”: listen carefully and do exactly what they say.
3 Likes
This same professor said that if you see people leaving a federal courthouse looking disappointed, it’s almost always because they just settled their case. Settlement in civil cases isn’t about getting what you want. It’s about getting what you can live with, so both sides often end up disappointed. So yes, it is absolutely best to settle civil disputes amicably (key word that) on your own before involving lawyers. Once you bring the lawyers in (again, just talking civil cases here), most of the time the only people who come out ahead are the lawyers.
4 Likes
Is he going to testify and play League at the same time?
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
