REUTERS
Sam Bankman-Fried has little to lose by bucking conventional wisdom and taking the stand at his criminal fraud trial, following weeks of testimony that he stole billions of dollars from unwitting customers of his FTX cryptocurrency exchange.
Doing so would expose Bankman-Fried to probing cross-examination by prosecutors who would come armed with documents, messages and testimony from cooperating witnesses that they can use to attack his credibility.
But given Bankman-Fried’s penchant for risk, his willingness to speak publicly about the charges and prosecutors’ unflattering portrayal of him at the trial, he may bet that he can convince just one juror that he did not intend to commit fraud, legal experts said.
Bankman-Fried’s lawyers have said he is considering taking the stand.
“It’s not irrational to testify, if you think you are going down because the evidence is so overwhelming,” defense attorney Ilene Jaroslaw said.
Defendants are not required to testify in criminal cases, but sometimes do so in a bid to raise doubt that prosecutors have proved their case.
Elizabeth Holmes took the stand at her criminal trial, testifying over several days that she did not intend to defraud investors in her blood-testing startup, Theranos. Holmes was ultimately convicted on four out of 11 counts and sentenced to more than 11 years in prison.
For Bankman-Fried to be convicted of fraud, prosecutors must show beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to defraud FTX customers or investors. The 12 jurors must agree unanimously to return a verdict.
Prosecutors are expected to rest their case on Thursday. Bankman-Fried stands accused of looting customer money to make speculative venture investments, donate…
