Unchained Why SBF's Testimony So Far Has Likely Already Doomed Him - Ep. 563
Oct 30, 2023
Sam Enzer, a partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, shares keen legal insights on Sam Bankman-Fried's controversial trial. He discusses how Bankman-Fried's testimony may falter under rigorous cross-examination. Enzer argues that the ex-CEO's rationale for borrowing billions from customer assets lacks credibility and contradicts foundational agreements. The evidentiary hearing without a jury may backfire, providing the prosecution ammunition. Delving into courtroom dynamics, Enzer highlights how demeanor and testimony can sway juror perceptions.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
SBF's Testimony Effectiveness
- Sam Bankman-Fried's testimony is going as well as it can for him, but he is unlikely to prevail.
- His narrative will likely fall apart during cross-examination.
Alameda's Borrowing Justification
- SBF's justification for Alameda borrowing billions of dollars in customer funds is based on a distorted interpretation of FTX's terms of service.
- This interpretation lacks supporting documentation and contradicts common sense.
Defense Strategy and Cross-Examination
- The defense's strategy involves humanizing SBF and normalizing concepts to influence the jury.
- Prosecutor Danielle Sassoon's cross-examination will likely expose weaknesses in SBF's testimony.
