Bloomberg Law
SBF Faces Tough Cross-Examination
Oct 31, 2023
Former federal prosecutor Michael Weinstein and Bloomberg legal reporter Ava Benny-Morrison discuss the cross-examination of Sam Bankman-Fried. Fara Sunderji, a partner at Dorsey & Whitney, discusses upcoming Supreme Court oral arguments over the trademark 'Trump Too Small'.
33:41
Episode guests
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- The prosecutor challenged Sam Bankman-Fried's credibility by presenting contradictory statements and highlighting his active involvement in directing funds and making self-benefitting decisions.
- Through cross-examination, the prosecutor aimed to undermine Sam Bankman-Fried's credibility by pointing out inconsistencies between his testimony and his previous public statements, while also highlighting his closer relationship with Alameda than he portrayed.
Deep dives
Sam Bagman-Fried's Testimony
During direct examination, Sam Bagman-Fried painted himself as a disengaged CEO who didn't oversee Alameda research, didn't code, and only skimmed the firm's terms of service. However, on cross-examination, the prosecutor confronted him with numerous public and private statements that contradicted his narrative. The prosecutor challenged his credibility and tried to show that he was actively involved in directing the transfer of funds and making decisions that benefitted him personally. While Bagman-Fried appeared relaxed during direct examination, he became more combative and vague under cross-examination.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
