I Didn’t Intend to Be… Or Did I?

Sam Bankman-Fried's Courtroom Responses Require Improvement

Bankman-Fried’s responses in court are lacking.

Let me take you on a wild ride into the courtroom drama surrounding FTX founder, Sam Bankman-Fried. This guy’s got tricks up his sleeve that would make Houdini proud. Rumor has it that he’s been using FTX customer and investor funds to live the life of luxury. Private jets and luxury apartments? Oh, you betcha!

Now, picture this: there’s Sam Bankman-Fried, sitting in court like he’s in the middle of a reality show. The assistant U.S. attorney approaches him, holding a document that literally states he’s the chairman and sole board member of Alameda Research. And what does he say? Brace yourself, my friends. He claims, “I did not intend to be.” Talk about playing a game of semantics!

But hold your horses, there’s more to this story. This trial just keeps getting more intriguing, especially now that Sam Bankman-Fried is taking the stand. It’s a battle of credibility, and the jury is the ultimate judge.

When Bankman-Fried’s defense attorney questioned him, he appeared slicker than Rob Lowe with DirecTV. He had his explanations down pat, trying to convince the jury that FTX’s demise was not his doing. Smooth move, I must admit.

• The SBF Trial: Bald Lawyers, Blowouts, and Shifty Testimonies
• Breaking News: Valkyrie Files Updated Bitcoin ETF with the SEC
• The Heroes of Social Media TikTok, Snapchat, OnlyFans, and Co. Unite to Battle AI-generated Child Abuse Content!

But then, the moment of truth arrives. Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon steps in, and things take a turn. Bankman-Fried goes from DirecTV version to the rough, cable-TV version of himself. It’s like watching a car crash in slow motion.

Sassoon starts asking about Alameda Research and its board membership. The back-and-forth is mind-boggling. Bankman-Fried seems to be lost in a maze of words, unable to give a straight answer. It’s like watching a dog chase its tail.

At one point, Sassoon shows him a document that clearly states he’s the only board member. She asks him if he was indeed the only member. And his response? “I’m not sure which board this refers to.” Seriously? I couldn’t make this stuff up if I tried.

Judge Lewis Kaplan had to step in, trying to make sense of the chaos. He asks Bankman-Fried if he accidentally became a director. It’s like calling out a magician for his sleight of hand.

But it’s not just the confusion that’s the problem. Bankman-Fried’s responses are vague and evasive. He dances around questions like a ballerina in a minefield. Judge Kaplan has to remind him to give simple answers like “yes” or “no.” It’s a courtroom, not a TED Talk!

And let’s not forget about Sassoon’s masterful cross-examination. She catches him in a web of contradictions, pointing out inconsistencies in his previous statements. It’s like watching a cat toy with a mouse. Whack!

But wait, there’s more! Sassoon brings up Bankman-Fried’s efforts to shape his image, reminding him of the people he told. He conveniently claims he doesn’t remember telling any of them. Nice try, buddy!

And if that wasn’t enough, Sassoon even brings up Bankman-Fried’s lavish lifestyle. She asks him if he remembers flying to the Super Bowl on a private plane. You won’t believe what he says. Brace yourself! He answers, “I don’t remember.” Seriously, man? That’s like forgetting your own name.

But let’s get serious for a moment. Bankman-Fried has two major issues here. First, he struggles to provide satisfying responses to the prosecution’s questions. Second, his credibility takes a hit as he fumbles through his words. It’s like watching a magician reveal his trick and forgetting the magic words.

So, dear readers, the ball is in your court now. What do you think? Is he guilty as charged, or is this all just smoke and mirrors? Let the jury decide!

Stories you may have missed:

• Do Kwon’s Terraform Labs Seeks Early Court Rejection of U.S. SEC Case: Terraform Labs and its co-founder, Do Kwon, are fighting back against the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
• Crypto Exchange Linked to 3AC Founders Drops Lawsuit Against Mike Dudas: In a surprising turn of events, a crypto exchange linked to 3AC founders withdraws its lawsuit against Mike Dudas.
• U.K. Publishes Final Proposals for Crypto, Stablecoin Regulation: The U.K. is laying down the law with plans for regulating cryptocurrency and stablecoins.

This week:

• Wednesday, 18:00 UTC (2:00 p.m. ET): Brace yourself for the FOMC meeting. Will it affect the housing market? Keep your arm and leg intact!
• Thursday, 07:00 UTC (8:00 a.m. BST): Our friends in the U.K. get to find out if they’ll have to pay an arm and a leg for their dream homes next year.

Elsewhere:

• Politico: House Financial Services Committee Chair, Patrick McHenry, reveals his “pure anger” when he had to step in after former Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s ousting.
• Wall Street Journal: An eye-opening investigative report on Terra’s Do Kwon and how he ended up in a Montenegrin jail cell.
• Intelligencer: Your guide to my whereabouts over the past few weeks. Don’t worry, I’ve got the trial coverage on lock!

If you have thoughts on what I should cover next week or any feedback, reach out to me at [email protected] or find me on Twitter [@nikhileshde](https://twitter.com/nikhileshde). And don’t forget to join the lively conversation on Telegram.

See you around, crypto enthusiasts! And remember, even in the wild world of crypto, truth and simplicity go a long way.

We will continue to update Blocking; if you have any questions or suggestions, please contact us!