Pushkin.
Welcome to Judging Sam, our podcast about the trial of Sam Bangman freed. I'm Michael Lewis and I'm here outside the courthouse with Lydia Jane Kott doing actual reporting. I'm off my book tour and we're going to be together in the courthouse for the next four days. Lydia Jane was in that she got here, was at three in the morning or four in the four thirty in the morning, was in the overflow room and I got here late and thanks to Lydia Jean's while snuck into the main
courtroom to watch Sam Bagman free testify. I want to So we're gonna start with you because you actually took notes. I just sat and watched. What was your What were your takeaways today?
So first off, we should say that it was kind of a rehearsal for Sam mcmnfried's testament.
Surely we should explain this. Do you understand it? Because I can try, but you made me understand it better.
Basically, what happened is that the prosecution rested and then the defense began their case. So we had two really quick witnesses. Who was it someone lawyer from the Bahamas.
It was Sam's lawyer from the Bahamas who had met Don on the Bahamas, and it was a financial expert who was trying to say something that didn't make a whole lot of sense about the FTX accounts.
And then there's this. The prosecution and the defense have been arguing about whether they can use not a formal advice of counsel defense. But the defense wants to say that Sam Makmun Freed talked to lawyers and that gave him some comfort in the decisions that he made going forward, and the prosecution does not want that to be brought
in front of the jury. And the judge wasn't able to make a decision, so he asked basically to hear the testimony and then after he hears it, he's going to decide whether or not the jury can hear it as well. And this is really rare.
He never it is never right noticed.
I was sitting next to a lawyer and lawyer said he'd never really seen this happen before.
I was an next a lawyer who told me the same thing.
And so there was and it went on for I don't know, three hours, maybe more. And what was so interesting about it to me? There were six things that were interesting about it to me. But the first was the actual testimony that Sam's lawyers weren't introduce. I couldn't see what it was so controversial about it. It was pretty straightforward, kind of dull, useful to a point. You could see that the lawyers were signing off on certain documents that seemed to authorize Sam to do things like
use FTX custom money to buy stuff. But what was so interesting is the cross examination and Danielle Sassoon, who was the government lawyer. The prosecutor, used this occasion to not just question the specific testimony that Sam wanted to deliver, but essentially try the whole case, which she was willing to do. They were going to be there till nine at night. The judge was getting I've been walking around?
Oh he was, so he looked was he doing that thing that he leans over?
He was clearly irritated a little bit with her.
But her question was so interesting that you could see him getting irritated with Sam at how long, at how he was answering the questions. This most single most important line, Well, first was he said to Sam, henceforth, listen to the question and answer the question. Directly, which I wish I could have said to Sam for the last two years because I you know, this is a running theme in the book that Sam, you ask him a question, you get a different answer.
You didn't judge didn't listen to you.
But the other thing was the judge just kind of all by himself, says. The witness has an interesting way of answering questions.
I shouldn't know it on that as well.
And this is if you really have to listen for it, it's a gift. It's almost like an art form. With Sam.
Most people, when they don't answer your question, you instantly realize they didn't answer your question. Sam is so good at not answering your question. If you're not really on top of it, you're lulled into thinking your question was answered and facing a less capable lawyer, he'd be very seductive. Sam's just natural way of answering questions could be an
eventtastically effective strategy. The problem is the lawyer's right on top of it, and what's going to happen tomorrow if he doesn't watch it is that the jury is going to be irritated with him, and because he's going to be pointed out again and again and again, and they're going to start to see, oh my god, he's not
answering the question. The jury would never be able to figure out the sam wasn't in answering the question less people pointed it out to them, and it's going to be pointed out over and over.
I bet, yeah, yeah. I took a note on that, actually, because at one point the prosecutor was trying to she was having him look at the forms that people signed to have their money go into be sent to North to mention, which eventually ended up in Alameda, and she was asking whether that meant that Alameda could use those funds, and she said where exactly? And he said I think so essentially right, And she said where exactly on the form does it say that?
And there's this long, incredible silence.
I timed it was over a minute.
It felt like five minutes.
And she said something like, if you need me too, I can turn the page.
Yes, and then and then he had an.
Answer which started, I should prep that I'm not a lawyer, But the part that jives with that, I don't think this goes with how you most recently phrase this. And by that point I've already lost the thread.
That's right, and you could see. I mean, it's almost superpower. And I gotta say that he's not conventionally dishonest.
What he does is evade.
Questions if he doesn't want to answer them. But I tell you this, what makes the evasion so powerful. He answers the question he wants to answer, even if you ask him a question that doesn't particularly bother him.
He does this with every question.
He does it very very, very ably, just generally, and it's a little spell minded.
And I thought, first I put myself in his shoes.
He's been sitting in that jail for what two months or so, he's or almost two months.
He's lost a bunch of weight. He looks different.
His suit fit so badly.
He's like a box.
It's like he stole it off a middle linebacker from the New York Giants and tries it is trying to wear it, but yeah.
It doesn't fit. He was unbelievably composed, very smart, very.
Persuasive in places I thought, I mean, I think, if I was just coming to this fresh and even though I'm coming to it with everything, I know, you find him very persuasive.
I'm direct. I thought we all thought he did great. After it's all the journalists were like, that couldn't have gone better?
Right, That's what I thought the Cross It's not that it went horribly, it's that you could see how tomorrow could go horribly.
Is what I thought.
Is that he was he was getting under the judge's skin, and he was getting under the prosecutor's skin, but in a way that was going to get under the jury's skin that they were not gonna like this, Like when they asked him a simple question, he should give a simple answer. And this is never a simple answer with Sam.
It's always complicated. It's like you are instantly in Sam Bank mcfred world when you ask him a question and you're playing either playing a very complicated board game or trying to solve some puzzle that he's created for you.
And it's beguiling. It's just absolutely beguiling.
Just the.
Poise so kind of amazed me.
If I were in his situation, I would be a bundle of nerves. My mind would be someplace else when they're asking me to questions. I would not be able to track the way he's tracking stuff. And he was clearly on top of it all.
Yeah, he's he.
Had some tells though. Did you see that when the prosecutor gave him a piece of paper and his hand was shaking so much? It was like, maybe because in the overflow rooms you can see because the camera's right up on his face, the paper was like shaking really hard.
So the view I had of him, I had the best view about the best view in the courtroom of him, which was a poor view of the jury, but it's a good view of him and the judge. And all you really saw was his shoulders as his head. I couldn't see his hands, and I couldn't and I wonder where his leg.
Was bouncing up and now I couldn't see it.
I don't know if you can actually see his leg bouncing, but that will be happening because that's.
Just how he is.
The Other thing that struck me is like, it's so seldom that I've seen him do one thing at a time that where they actually sit and have a conversation with someone where he isn't playing a video game or true. It's always this other reality that occupies him, and I think it him.
It's not his natural way of interacting with people.
He's shuffling card decks or he's doing and so he's really being.
Stressed by this, like his natural mo o is not allowed.
I'm just I'm kind of impressed by his fiber, you know, I just like I'm impressed by by how he was.
Hard to do and riveting as theater. Just like riveting as theater. Yeah, I don't. I mean, did you? Were you getting the same vibe that, like, he's not answering the question, were you?
Well, we were all. We were all every time he started doing answering a question, we were all like, oh no, so.
What the substance of the thing.
They were supposed to be just talking of those two and a half hour three hours about whether they could introduce the role that lawyers played in his life, and instead she did Daniel Sasson took it to a place where did you think it was okay? Did you think you had the right to uh to steal customers money?
Did you do you remember the part there was a section about safeguarding and she said, what does safeguarding mean to you?
Yes?
Sam, that is it just keeping Because originally he talked about how one way that they safeguarded customer assets was to try and protect from hacks, right, And then she said to safeguarding, I mean only protecting from hacks and he responded, no, I had more to say, and she said to you, does it also mean not embuzzling funds?
And he said, you know, And at that moment that his lawyer objected, the judge said sustained, like you're not going to have to answer that question. And he answered it anyway, and he smile, he laughed. He said, I felt I needed to answer that one.
And he said he does think safeguarding includes not inmbuzzling funds exactly.
He had a humor about him, which was also to his credit, and the judge, you know, it's funny. The judge obviously had an abstract dislike of him by the time he arrived here for his trial, and based on Sam seeming, they're going to be testing every.
Rule of house arrest.
And the judge has a reputation is he and judge, But you could tell the judge is taking an interest in him.
Oh yeah, like you have a really unusual way of answering questions.
But he also like there was a moment when the judge needed blockchain or something explained, and asked Sam to explain it.
Sam's a wonderful explainer.
You can see how good a teacher it is, right like when he wants to explain something here, really very good at doing it. And the judge was, I could tell it if this thing we're going to jump the shark. The judge would get really interested in crypto in the middle of this trial and just sort of pause the trial to have Sam teach him all about crypto because.
He's just so interesting what he's learning from Sam.
And there was a little of that going on, and in the darkness of his soul, in his most private place, I think the judge would say, this is an interesting person.
And the judge even made a bit of a comment like that. At one point, Sam BigMan Freed said I'm not sure if I should answer this question. He said something legal like, I'm worried it's outside the scope. I forget what exact legal term was, and the judg responded, leave that to me. You know your role is to explain blockchain basically, that's right to me, Yeah, exactly exactly.
Judging Sam will be right back. Welcome back to judging, Sam.
I've just arrived at the court.
It's the first time I've been here twenty seven days. I've been on the road, and I've had a couple like reactions.
It's funny.
I feel like I've walked into your high school. That's what I They already have their clicks. Yes, they already know they're having lunch with. Yeah, they already know who's they're going to share notes with, and who's okay to talk to and who's not there. There is this obviously a group, and you're included in this group of the highly ambitious, aggressive people who get here early enough.
To get into the courtroom.
Yes, I mean I talked to one coming out the door. She says she got to hear a bit before three in the morning, and she was seventh and one.
And then, were you like, my producer is such as slacker because she got to here four thirty.
I met the one of the marshalls who who watches the door and delightful guy. Oh, they're great, delightful guy. But this was even better. He listens to this podcast.
Now, if you'd ask me, what if I was a marshal in a courthouse and I spent my day watching that trial, what would I do with my free time afterwards?
It would not be.
Listening to a podcast about the trial. But he's listening to the podcast about the trial and he's read the book. And his attitude about that was, it's I really love knowing the story like the person. You know, you don't get the story here. You get none of the humanity, you get none of the real person. And that was and that's something you notice in these from these trials, as you're getting such a weird, abstracted sliver of the
experience and none of the context. And the only way you're getting the characters really is indirectly from how they are on the witness stand.
Yeah. Yeah, and then you end up filling a lot of the gaps or your imagination.
That's right, and that's that's right. So, uh, what else did I notice?
How chill like the guards are going into the place like it's not it doesn't feel like all these people, these peop we should be in charge of TSA if TSA ran as well as this, and it was just fun to go through and as easy and as reasonable like flying would be a different experience.
So I was surprised by that.
I thought it was gonna be miserable bureaucracy, and actually they're like they're kind of really good at what they whatever.
They run this place.
Well, I'm surprised by art struck by how authoritative the judge is, Like, he just runs the thing it is that he's not. He just takes no nonsense.
And I can almost I get the point today where I could guess where he was gonna lose his patience.
Yeah, you were telling me, and then right after that you.
Could see I could say, this is bothering me, So I bet it's bothering him. And then right away, boom, he's on it. And I thought that's kind of It's kind of cool. I imagined him. I don't know it, and I imagine, but I didn't imagine it would be quite.
As aggress as aggressive as he was. This is a side and kind of narcissistic note. It was kind of funny walking too. Everybody wanted me to signed books.
Yeah, I thought that It's funny that I didn't realize the book was quite as well.
People bring your book every day, it's not just because they knew you were coming.
It was fun to see that people are kind of in the middle of it. And so this is like this other reality. There's this trial going on in this libretto to the opera, so I wasn't expecting that.
What else caught my eye? Oh well, you know, if you're in there, just what a partial view you get. This is true to life.
No matter where you are, you always just see where your view is your view, And just because you're in the courtroom doesn't mean you have the whole.
Yeah, you have the view of either the witness or maybe you can see the jury.
You can see maybe the sides of the faces of Sam's parents, see backs of the prosecutors. Just because you're there, it doesn't mean you're there. My normal reporting, like instinct is to literally when I'm to walk around to.
See whatever the setting is.
If it's like ftx's office in the Bahamas, I would just I'd sit in different places. I'd see it, trying to see it from every angle, because you never know what you're missing if you're just sitting in one spot and here you're kind of.
Constrained because you can't quite do that. Yeah, there's a little part of me that was a tiny bit frustrated.
Did pick out the guy on the on the jury who was apparently my former Solomon Brother's colleague, And I find it just wild that the person who probably.
Knows the most about this and can explain to everybody else, was it Solomon the Brothers me, there's something full circle is about this.
I just can't get out of my head because I really was thinking of Liars Poker and I read this book.
I thought, it's like it's another version of what's supposed to be a.
Business being actually, you know, off the rails, frat house kind of the behavior that's going on in here bears no relation to what people think when they think corporation. It's this all over again, but it's being recreated in crypto different characters. It's nerds rather than jocks, and it's but it's but same little bit of the same vibe. And so that we have the guy who was there at the start sitting there in the trial making evaluations of this version of it.
I wonder if it's gonna that Penty's gonna drop for him.
Yeah, I wonder he's been paying attention, close.
Attention, seemed you know, I only on a glimpse of it.
So tomorrow Sam Mgmunfreed will take the stand for real in front of a jury. Yes, what are you interested to see?
See?
If he had adjusts in response to what just happened, and makes a point of trying to answer simply and directly questions every possible question that could be answered simply and directly. And if he doesn't, how that plays, And there'll be lots of root questions and he'll be asked and he'll have to answer, and I think he has answers for some of them. I think this is that it's it's some ways a very simple case, but some
ways a very complicated case. And I think that we'll see both both sides of it tomorrow, and I suspect it's gonna.
Go on all day.
I definitely. I mean Sam doesn't answer quickly.
No, he's drawing this out right.
Well, I'm excited to see you tomorrow.
All right, see tomorrow.
We'll be back in your feed soon with more expert analysis and news from Sam Bekman Freed's trial. Thanks for listening. Lydia Get is our court reporter. Katherine Gerardeau and Nisha Venken produced this show. Sophie Crane is our editor. Our music was composed by Matthias Bossi and John Evans of stell Wagons.
Symphonet.
Judging Sam is a production of Pushkin Industries. Got a question or comment for me, There's a website for that atr podcast dot com. That's atr podcast dot com. To find more Pushkin podcasts, listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your podcasts. If you'd like to access bonus episodes and listen ad free, don't forget to sign up for a Pushkin Plus subscription at pushkin dot fm, slash plus, or on our Apple show page