- Impossible Defense: David Mills, Sam Bankman-Fried’s lawyer, admitted that the FTX founder’s criminal trial was “almost impossible” to win from the beginning.
- Damning Testimony: Mills cited Bankman-Fried’s resistance to legal advice and damaging testimony from former associates as key factors hindering their case.
- Alternative Strategy: Lawyer hinted that a more successful strategy might have involved acknowledging the prosecution’s allegations and witnesses’ statements while focusing on Bankman-Fried’s genuine intention to save FTX from collapse.
Uphill Battle from the Beginning
Mills paints a grim picture of the defense’s uphill battle, stating that the case was “almost impossible” to win from the very start. He cites two primary factors for this pessimism: Bankman-Fried’s reluctance to follow his lawyer’s recommendations and the devastating impact of testimonies delivered by former associates. These former colleagues provided damning evidence against Bankman-Fried, significantly weakening the defense’s case.
Could Bankman-Fried’s Defense Have Been Stronger?
David further revealed a potential alternative strategy that could have yielded a more favorable outcome. He suggests that acknowledging the prosecution’s claims and the witnesses’ statements, rather than contesting them, could have been a more effective approach. This admission would have conceded certain aspects of the case but shifted the focus to Bankman-Fried’s intentions, emphasizing his genuine desire to stabilize and save FTX from bankruptcy.