Written by: Jesse Coghlan, CoinTelegraph
Compiled by: Wuzhu, Golden Finance
Sam Bankman-Fried’s criminal trial may have been marred by his neurodivergent disorder, leading to “lengthy answers” that frustrated the court, a group of doctors said in an amicus brief supporting his appeal.
Eight neurodivergent physicians told the Second Circuit in a Sept. 20 amicus brief in support of Bankman-Fried that the FTX co-founder’s diagnosis with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) “presents significant challenges in the prosecution of this case.”
They claim that because Bankman-Fried suffers from neurodivergent disorder, several rulings went against him, particularly a Manhattan District Court ruling that government prosecutors could cross-examine him without a jury before he sat before one.
The ruling “may have far-reaching consequences” because “the judge repeatedly chided Mr Bankman-Fried for his lengthy responses and attempts to clarify or rephrase questions” — characteristics of people with autism, doctors said, because they understand language in a literal way.
They also claimed the judge's punishment later caused Bankman-Fried to change his answers before the jury.
“Mr. Bankman-Fried significantly corrected before the jury and may have overcorrected,” they wrote.
"Unlike his responses under cross-examination outside the presence of the jury, Mr. Bankman-Fried's responses before the jury were typically brief, even terse -- often a simple 'yes.'"
The highlighted excerpt analysis said Bankman-Fried used just one or two words in half of his responses when he faced the jury on his first day
Source: CourtListener
"Such a brief response could easily be misinterpreted as arrogance or indifference," the brief said.
In March, Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison for defrauding FTX customers of $11 billion. Judge Lewis Kaplan said Bankman-Fried “evaded, quibbled, and tried to get prosecutors to rephrase questions.”
Lack of documentation and medicines 'serious obstacles'
The doctors added that Bankman-Fried's lack of access to "a battery of FTX documents" and appropriate ADHD medication was also a disadvantage.
“For individuals with ASD, the lack of specific documentation can be a significant barrier,” they said, adding that for the first three weeks of the trial, Bankman-Fried was also “denied ADHD medications, which were necessary for him to maintain his attention and focus.”
Bankman-Fried (second from right) stands trial at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn in December 2023
Source: Tiffany Fong
If people with autism looked at "the specific documents and exact wording of company policies, recommendations, emails, etc," the doctors wrote, they "would be able to find a concrete basis for their responses."
Without the documentation, the doctor said, people with autism "are often fraught with uncertainty" in their responses and may appear "uncooperative or evasive."
The brief noted that during the initial phase of the trial, when the government presented evidence, Bankman-Fried was also "deprived of his ability to focus" because he was not receiving the proper dose of ADHD medication — a point his attorneys raised during the trial.
Bankman-Fried needed to take extended-release medication in the morning and at noon to help him focus throughout the day, but he took only half of his previous dose and did not take the extended-release medication "until very late in the trial," the doctor said.
Excerpts from the doctor's brief statement at trial regarding Bankman-Fried's medication use
Source: CourtListener
They added that "failure to deliver effective doses of ADHD medications can significantly impair functioning," while changing doses may even "lead to withdrawal symptoms."
Cross-issues between criminal cases and bankruptcy cases: case filing
Meanwhile, a group of bankruptcy law professors filed an amicus brief the same day, supporting neither Bankman-Fried nor the government — raising concerns about crossover between the FTX bankruptcy case and the Bankman-Fried trial.
They argue that FTX’s bankruptcy proceedings providing assistance to Bankman-Fried prosecutors “sets a dangerous precedent that encourages the aggressive use of Chapter 11 proceedings to support parallel criminal prosecutions.”
The group said the FTX estate’s contribution to the Bankman-Fried criminal trial was “extraordinary compared to previous cases,” citing the Enron and WorldCom cases in the early 2000s.
Key excerpts from law professor brief claiming FTX bankruptcy lawyers support suing Bankman-Fried
Source: CourtListener
They added that the pace of the Bankman-Fried trial meant jurors were told: “Customers were repeatedly and inaccurately told they would not get any money back from FTX.”
“However, Defendants were not given the opportunity to offer rebuttal evidence demonstrating that the Debtors were never found to be insolvent or that FTX customers might in fact have received nearly 150% of their claims,” they said.
FTX Asset Management said in May that it had enough money to repay creditors, plus "billions of dollars in compensation" — but the value of those funds was equivalent to the value of its assets at the time of bankruptcy in November 2022.
