FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s criminal trial has entered the jury selection phase, and it’s proven to be a challenging process. Jury selection is set to extend into a second day, with the initial pool of prospective jurors narrowed down to 50 candidates. From this group, 12 jurors will be selected to participate in the trial. However, many prospective jurors have recused themselves due to concerns that their experiences and biases might affect their ability to fairly assess the former crypto mogul’s innocence.
Sam Bankman-Fried’s trial jurors screened for biases
Some of the biases from the jurors stem from financial losses they incurred in the cryptocurrency market, which were exacerbated by FTX’s collapse last year. For instance, one prospective juror, identified as Zal Dang, juror number 29, expressed doubts about his ability to remain unbiased in a crypto-related case, stating. Dang pointed out that he has never had any negative thoughts about crypto since he understood it. This sentiment reflects the challenges of finding jurors who have not formed preconceived opinions about cryptocurrency.
Judge Lewis Kaplan took the opportunity to inquire about the jurors’ familiarity with FTX and its sister hedge fund, Alameda Research. He emphasized that the case would involve terms like “crypto” and “blockchain.” Surprisingly, two prospective jurors admitted to having invested in cryptocurrency but had experienced losses in this asset class. In addition to concerns related to cryptocurrency, some jurors disclosed peripheral career ties to the broader financial industry. One juror claimed to work with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), while another had connections to Bank United.
Going further, another had ties to Morgan Stanley—a bank that had previously shown optimism about the now-collapsed crypto bank, Silvergate, which had close connections with FTX. Judge Kaplan acknowledged that FTX’s collapse had garnered significant media attention and instructed the jurors to avoid all media coverage related to the trial. When he asked if any jurors were familiar with major names associated with the bankruptcy, including Silvergate, Anthony Scaramucci, and Caroline Elison, one juror revealed that she had worked for the fallen bank.
The impact of crypto understanding in the case
The judge also inquired if any jurors had watched a recent episode of CBS’s “60 Minutes,” in which author Michael Lewis discussed his experience with Sam Bankman-Fried and dismissed claims that FTX was a “Ponzi Scheme.” Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) faces charges of conspiracy and fraud, including allegations of defrauding customers by lending their deposits to Alameda without their consent. Experts have weighed in on the likelihood of Sam Bankman-Fried’s acquittal, with some expressing doubts due to the powerful witness testimony and evidence presented by prosecutors.
However, they also noted that the jury’s limited understanding of cryptocurrency might introduce an element of uncertainty that could make jurors hesitate to convict the exchange founder. Brian Newman, an attorney at the law firm Dykema Gossett, highlighted the challenge of convicting someone when the jury doesn’t fully comprehend the prosecution’s arguments, stating, “If the jury doesn’t know what the prosecution’s talking about, it’s pretty hard to convict beyond a reasonable doubt.”
One juror expressed their difficulty in understanding cryptocurrency. Judge Kaplan responded to him by noting that he was not the only one on the juror list who felt that way. This lack of understanding could indeed be a significant factor in the outcome of the trial. The jury selection process for Sam Bankman-Fried’s trial has proven to be complex due to prospective jurors’ biases, financial backgrounds, and limited understanding of cryptocurrency. The outcome of the trial remains uncertain, with legal experts and observers closely watching how the jury’s comprehension of crypto-related matters may influence their decision.
