🏅 Top traders

Okay the case that speaking without the jury is still testimony seems strong, but in the interest of care, an easier resolution may come out tomorrow or soon. Keeping open until we have resolution one way or the other

I have asked for this to be reopened.

@Ernie i can do that, what do you want that for?

@MarcusAbramovitch Apparently he was not testifying to the jury but rather speaking to the judge. Seems safer to keep it open.

@Ernie Reading reuters it sounds like he did testify and was cross examined.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/sam-bankman-fried-could-take-stand-fraud-trial-over-ftx-collapse-2023-10-26/

Sam Bankman-Fried testifies lawyers were involved in key FTX decisions

FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried testified on Thursday at his fraud trial outside the jury's presence that lawyers at his now-bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange were involved in key decisions at the heart of the case, as he sought to distance himself from responsibility for any wrongdoing.

@higherLEVELING Aren’t mainstream news outlets supposed to have legal journalists on deck who can talk accurately about what they’re covering? It’s unbelievable that they can’t get their act together. if Reuters is right, the Times is reporting like amateurs; if the Times is correct, Reuters is being sloppy. It does seem like he testified. So why is the Times saying the testimony was postponed?

@NicoDelon https://www.cnbc.com/video/2023/10/26/sam-bankman-fried-testifies-without-jurors-present-crypto-world.html

Sam Bankman-Fried testifies in his own trial without jurors present: CNBC Crypto World

CNBC Crypto World features the latest news and daily trading updates from the digital currency markets and provides viewers with a look at what's ahead with high-profile interviews, explainers, and unique stories from the ever-changing crypto industry. On today's show, Dave Weisberger of CoinRoutes reacts to the ETF anticipation-driven rally

@higherLEVELING For the record, I have no position on the legal facts—was it or not testimony. I find the Times reporting on this befuddling.

@NicoDelon He testifies in front of the judge and w lawyers so judge can determine if it can be used as evidence or not. If its permissible to use as evidence, he will have to testify again infront of the jury i believe, so i guess the times is correct also. Because he is testifying but it's to determine if it can be used as evidence.

@higherLEVELING Yes, I read that. So he gave a testimony but his testimony was postponed. You gotta give it to the paper of record to write the most equivocal headlines.

@NicoDelon How is it permissible to write this if SBF actually testified? That’s literally fake news. Yes, we understand the part about the jury. But this is phrased incredibly deceptively.

@NicoDelon it's true. A lawyer doesn't seem to have verified that language.

Hmm does testify imply the jury must be present? Or is this clearly technically a hearing and not testimony?

Is it testimony if the jury does hear it but later is told to disregard?

@Ernie The way the Times describes it, the testimony hasn’t happened yet. But like, I probably would have been fooled too.

@NicoDelon https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/10/26/business/sam-bankman-fried-ftx-trial

Interesting twist: this was—according to The NY Times—just a hearing, not a testimony, which has been postponed to Friday.

EDIT: news reports are conflicting. Was it testimony or not? I dunno.

"The defense calls Sam Bankman-Fried."

https://twitter.com/innercitypress/status/1717603416468324686

@Ernie can resolve, right?

/Ernie/how-many-days-will-sam-bankmanfried

Bloomberg has a very good take on this:

Will Bankman-Fried take the stand and testify in his own defense? Buddy he has posted on Substack in his own defense; of course he will testify. Bankman-Fried will talk to absolutely anyone, with no filter at all, about what happened at the end of FTX. You think he won’t talk to a jury about it?

Isn’t it risky for him to testify? Won’t he be subjected to withering cross-examination from well-prepared prosecutors who will trap him in lies? Well! I mean, sure, probably. But if he does not testify, all the jury will have is (1) the testimony of FTX customers who are like “all our money is gone,” (2) the testimony of all of his closest friends and colleagues testifying “yeah we stole all the money because Sam told us to” and (3) screenshots of FTX computer code that is like “IF you_feel_like_it THEN steal(all.the.money).” His testimony just cannot make things worse! The jury is going to get the prosecutors’ story and it is really, really, really, really bad for Bankman-Fried. He needs to tell his side of the story to have any shot at all. If his testimony has a 10% chance of being compelling and a 90% chance of being disastrous, that is all upside. [4] If he does not testify, that is 100% disastrous.

@MikeH sounds reasonable. Even the judge may already be 10/10 angry at him so it wouldn't be a sentencing risk

Actually if sbf believes in AGI then for him ten years sentence may be the same as fifty

Lots of traders, but low volume. Get in while the getting's good

Elizabeth Holmes couldn’t change the outcome and she has degrees of magnitude more charisma.

@BTE SBF gonna need to deepen that voice to get on her level.

@higherLEVELING 🤣