WEBVTT - Judging Sam: The Sentencing 0:00:15.316 --> 0:00:15.796 Pushkin. 0:00:25.836 --> 0:00:28.716 I'm Michael Lewis. This is Judging Sam. It's Thursday, March 0:00:28.756 --> 0:00:32.076 twenty eighth. My producer Lydy Jean and I are standing 0:00:32.156 --> 0:00:34.716 outside the federal courthouse where Sam Batman Free was just 0:00:34.756 --> 0:00:36.596 sentenced to twenty five. 0:00:36.516 --> 0:00:37.556 Years in jail. 0:00:38.156 --> 0:00:40.076 So what we can talk about with this more when 0:00:40.076 --> 0:00:41.796 we were back in, you know, but I'm curious what 0:00:41.836 --> 0:00:43.156 it was like in the I wasn't. 0:00:42.996 --> 0:00:44.276 In the court. Were you in the courtroom? 0:00:44.396 --> 0:00:44.596 Yeah? 0:00:44.716 --> 0:00:45.516 What was it like in there? 0:00:46.676 --> 0:00:48.876 I mean it was really it was very full, one 0:00:48.876 --> 0:00:50.956 of the fullest days in the courtroom. 0:00:51.196 --> 0:00:52.276 Is there any obvious emotion? 0:00:54.156 --> 0:00:57.596 I mean Sam BigMan Fried's parents were at some point 0:00:57.636 --> 0:00:59.636 they had their heads right up next to each other. 0:01:01.236 --> 0:01:04.236 And when Sam BigMan Freed came out, what struck me was, 0:01:04.676 --> 0:01:07.796 you know, he was really pale. His hair was totally wild, 0:01:08.076 --> 0:01:09.876 and you could hear the clinking of the. 0:01:09.756 --> 0:01:12.196 James, you could hear the clanking of the chains he 0:01:12.276 --> 0:01:14.236 was and he was holding his hands behind him as 0:01:14.276 --> 0:01:17.476 if he were handcuffed, and I thought, oh, that's just 0:01:17.556 --> 0:01:20.836 coincidental though he wasn't handcuffed. But when he got up 0:01:20.876 --> 0:01:22.476 to leave, he put his hands right behind him as 0:01:22.476 --> 0:01:24.996 if he were handcuffed again, and I suspect what happened 0:01:25.036 --> 0:01:26.676 was they just had a deal. You just look like 0:01:26.716 --> 0:01:28.716 you're handcuffed and we won't put the handcuffs on him. 0:01:28.996 --> 0:01:31.036 I didn't. That's a that's a good eye. What did 0:01:31.076 --> 0:01:33.196 you think? And Sam maguin Fred actually spoke. What did 0:01:33.276 --> 0:01:34.356 you think about what he said? 0:01:34.436 --> 0:01:37.116 I think he went on too long, but I think 0:01:37.156 --> 0:01:39.516 that he was sort of re litigating it and trying 0:01:39.516 --> 0:01:41.036 to say the things he didn't say when he was 0:01:41.076 --> 0:01:43.356 on the stand. None of it mattered from the point 0:01:43.356 --> 0:01:44.916 of the sentence. The sentence was established where ay of 0:01:44.916 --> 0:01:46.356 those people got up and spoke, So you kind of wonder, 0:01:46.396 --> 0:01:46.956 what's this all? 0:01:46.996 --> 0:01:47.236 Theater? 0:01:47.556 --> 0:01:49.716 So what we watched was theater. We could have just 0:01:49.756 --> 0:01:52.156 come and just had the judge read the sentence, but 0:01:52.276 --> 0:01:56.236 the and nothing that happened affected the sentence. 0:01:57.556 --> 0:02:01.996 But did it affect my perception? It just just increased. 0:02:01.556 --> 0:02:03.996 My perception that Sam is his own worst endemy. I mean, 0:02:03.996 --> 0:02:07.356 he gets up and the one thing he could do 0:02:08.356 --> 0:02:11.636 that would make would undermine the judge's view of him 0:02:11.756 --> 0:02:17.716 negative view of him, would be to express remorse. And 0:02:17.996 --> 0:02:21.996 the judge didn't hear any remorse. He did sort of respect. 0:02:22.036 --> 0:02:26.036 He expressed he was displeased. 0:02:25.476 --> 0:02:29.276 That it had all happened. Happened, yes, but it was 0:02:29.476 --> 0:02:31.396 it was not a whole lot more than that. And 0:02:32.076 --> 0:02:36.876 so it surprised me that he, I mean, he was 0:02:36.876 --> 0:02:38.676 playing not to the judge, he was playing to the 0:02:38.676 --> 0:02:42.356 media and trying to get his version of the events out. 0:02:43.156 --> 0:02:44.116 And the judge responded by. 0:02:44.076 --> 0:02:45.276 Saying, I can see what you're gonna do if I 0:02:45.316 --> 0:02:46.756 let you out too soon, You're gonna get this version 0:02:46.756 --> 0:02:47.316 of events out. 0:02:48.116 --> 0:02:50.436 And the fact is that there's some truth in his 0:02:50.556 --> 0:02:52.276 version of events. It's not like the truth was all 0:02:52.276 --> 0:02:52.956 on one side here. 0:02:53.316 --> 0:02:57.196 It's messy, and I'm just kind of I'm going to 0:02:57.276 --> 0:02:59.556 imagine what's rattling around in the judge's mind given his 0:02:59.596 --> 0:03:04.276 previous decisions. One of the things rattling around his mind, 0:03:04.796 --> 0:03:09.476 I bet was the line in Barbara freedst her to 0:03:09.556 --> 0:03:12.596 him that I'll never see my son out of jail. 0:03:12.956 --> 0:03:15.076 And I think some little part of him wanted to 0:03:15.076 --> 0:03:15.996 give her at least hope. 0:03:16.556 --> 0:03:18.196 And I noticed that he also asked for him to 0:03:18.236 --> 0:03:20.036 be in prison in San. 0:03:19.916 --> 0:03:20.996 Francis, in the Bay Or. 0:03:21.036 --> 0:03:22.316 I think he was thinking about the parents a little 0:03:22.316 --> 0:03:26.756 bit yeah, I also felt like he read my book. 0:03:27.076 --> 0:03:28.876 I was thinking the same thing when he was. 0:03:28.836 --> 0:03:30.916 Talking about James exactly right, that it all grew out 0:03:30.956 --> 0:03:31.516 of Jane Street. 0:03:31.516 --> 0:03:32.356 Because that is true. 0:03:32.396 --> 0:03:35.076 I mean this the way of this confirmation of his 0:03:35.196 --> 0:03:39.836 approach to life. Yeah, it's it only really starts in 0:03:39.956 --> 0:03:44.156 Jane Street. It was funny to me that he sort 0:03:44.156 --> 0:03:46.116 of implicated James Street in that. 0:03:46.676 --> 0:03:47.796 I thought he was doing that. 0:03:47.836 --> 0:03:51.076 A little bit that because he was he disapproves of 0:03:51.116 --> 0:03:55.916 this worldview, and this worldview, this, this world view was 0:03:56.356 --> 0:03:57.236 the worldview. 0:03:56.836 --> 0:03:59.796 Of Jane Street, the idea of expected value. 0:03:59.916 --> 0:04:03.356 Yeah, which isn't necessarily a bad worldview, but it's uh, 0:04:03.396 --> 0:04:06.276 but it bothers a judge anyway. Well, this is what 0:04:06.276 --> 0:04:08.516 happens when you replace principles with probabilities. 0:04:08.596 --> 0:04:09.476 Judges get pissed. 0:04:11.596 --> 0:04:15.356 I can't be sorry for some time. 0:04:18.036 --> 0:04:24.916 We're outside of a door of a federal building. Has 0:04:24.916 --> 0:04:34.076 just arrived for the security guard. So it's about an 0:04:34.116 --> 0:04:37.676 hour after Sam makmund freed sentencing. Michael Lewis and I 0:04:37.676 --> 0:04:40.756 are back in the studio and we're joined by Rebecca Mermelstein. 0:04:41.196 --> 0:04:44.196 She is a former federal prosecutor at the Southern District 0:04:44.236 --> 0:04:46.996 of New York, which is the office that prosecuted Sam. 0:04:47.316 --> 0:04:49.516 And she's a partner at the law firm O Melvanie 0:04:49.556 --> 0:04:50.076 and Myers. 0:04:50.956 --> 0:04:53.316 Hi, Rebecca, Hi, guys. 0:04:53.116 --> 0:04:54.436 So I'm gonna starts off, Rebecca. 0:04:54.556 --> 0:04:57.116 I saw there are several things that are just bewildering 0:04:57.116 --> 0:04:59.316 to me, and can I can I just take them 0:04:59.316 --> 0:05:01.276 one by one and maybe you can help explain. 0:05:00.956 --> 0:05:01.316 Them to me. 0:05:01.796 --> 0:05:04.676 One is the judge obviously comes in with the sentence 0:05:04.676 --> 0:05:07.196 on a piece of paper. He's already decided what the 0:05:07.196 --> 0:05:11.516 sentence is. It would take in about forty five seconds 0:05:11.996 --> 0:05:16.596 to deliver the sentence. Instead, there was two plus hours 0:05:16.676 --> 0:05:22.356 of theater where Sam's lawyer got up, the prosecution got up, 0:05:22.716 --> 0:05:26.396 someone a victim got up and spoke. Sam Begman Free 0:05:26.476 --> 0:05:29.756 delivered a long and rambling statement from his feet. I mean, 0:05:29.756 --> 0:05:32.836 one thing after another happened that none of which could 0:05:32.916 --> 0:05:34.836 conceivably influence the sentence. 0:05:35.116 --> 0:05:37.236 And I'm wondering what is it all for? Like? What 0:05:37.276 --> 0:05:38.356 was what did I just watch? 0:05:40.236 --> 0:05:43.116 I would start by rejecting the premise that it was preordained, 0:05:43.196 --> 0:05:45.556 that it was Onofe's paper, and that it was all theater. 0:05:45.796 --> 0:05:49.876 Although I know what you mean, I have seen judges 0:05:50.156 --> 0:05:54.956 actually after the substantive presentation of a sentencing is complete. 0:05:55.236 --> 0:05:58.076 The prosecution has spoke, the defense has spoke, the defendant 0:05:58.116 --> 0:06:01.916 has spoken. I've seen judges leave the courtroom and go 0:06:01.996 --> 0:06:04.716 back to their chambers to give it some thought before 0:06:04.796 --> 0:06:08.516 imposing sentence. So I don't think it's just theater now. 0:06:08.676 --> 0:06:10.956 Having said that, of course, this is a case where 0:06:10.996 --> 0:06:14.196 the judge knows a lot about the case before the 0:06:14.236 --> 0:06:18.116 sentencing starts. He presided over the trial. The parties each 0:06:18.316 --> 0:06:21.236 filed written submissions. I think the governments is like one 0:06:21.316 --> 0:06:23.836 hundred and twenty pages, the defense is eighty something pages. 0:06:23.916 --> 0:06:27.316 So the information was already there. And I don't disagree 0:06:27.356 --> 0:06:31.796 with you that it is unlikely that anything said in 0:06:31.836 --> 0:06:34.396 the court room itself by the defendant, by the lawyers 0:06:34.476 --> 0:06:36.516 is going to change where the judge comes out, and 0:06:36.556 --> 0:06:40.036 that the judge was already sort of largely decided on 0:06:40.076 --> 0:06:42.996 twenty five years before he came out, and that nothing 0:06:43.036 --> 0:06:46.556 he heard changed it. So why do we do it, 0:06:46.676 --> 0:06:50.196 I think, is your question. Some of it is legally required. 0:06:50.316 --> 0:06:53.716 There are rules, for example, right that allow victims the 0:06:53.796 --> 0:06:55.996 right to be heard at sentencing, that allow defendants the 0:06:56.036 --> 0:06:59.716 right to be heard at sentencing judges sometimes do have 0:07:00.516 --> 0:07:06.196 questions for the parties about underlying facts, about the disagreements 0:07:06.196 --> 0:07:09.996 about the sentencing guidelines. So I don't think it's a 0:07:10.036 --> 0:07:13.716 waste of time or just political or legal theater. But 0:07:13.756 --> 0:07:15.756 I don't disagree with you. That judge. 0:07:15.796 --> 0:07:17.316 We know he knew it was going because when it 0:07:17.316 --> 0:07:19.516 came down to sentence he said, wait, I lost the 0:07:19.556 --> 0:07:21.356 piece of paper and he got so he had to 0:07:21.396 --> 0:07:23.676 go find his piece of paper with the sentence on it. 0:07:23.836 --> 0:07:25.356 So we know there was a piece of paper and 0:07:25.356 --> 0:07:29.916 he'd already written on it. So that so that was 0:07:29.956 --> 0:07:33.316 my first question. My second question was they did all 0:07:33.316 --> 0:07:36.836 this math in the beginning, and I thought, well, the 0:07:36.916 --> 0:07:40.156 judge is going to have no discretion whatsoever? Is what 0:07:40.236 --> 0:07:41.876 it sounds like if you know what, if you knew nothing, 0:07:41.916 --> 0:07:43.836 you think, are they just going to calculate the sentence 0:07:43.836 --> 0:07:48.036 here that the crime is going to generate a number? 0:07:48.676 --> 0:07:55.196 And instead, having calculated the math, the judge basically more 0:07:55.196 --> 0:07:59.076 than basically conceded that that the criminal justice system does 0:07:59.116 --> 0:08:02.476 not work unless the sentence squares with just the average 0:08:02.476 --> 0:08:05.556 man on the streets feeling of what's reasonable, and that 0:08:05.556 --> 0:08:08.596 that you know that that's the important test is you 0:08:08.636 --> 0:08:10.996 hear the crime, you hear the sentence, and then average 0:08:10.996 --> 0:08:12.876 man on the street says, oh, yeah, that sounds about right. 0:08:13.996 --> 0:08:17.356 And he then proceeded on a very kind of emotional 0:08:17.436 --> 0:08:23.116 and beautifully scripted little speech about how he felt about 0:08:23.116 --> 0:08:25.636 this whole thing and how we all should feel about it. 0:08:25.956 --> 0:08:27.316 And it was like we were in the land of 0:08:27.356 --> 0:08:30.836 moral sentiment rather than math when he started to talk 0:08:30.876 --> 0:08:33.796 about what the sentence was going to be and why, 0:08:34.476 --> 0:08:36.316 and you got the feeling he could have said one 0:08:36.356 --> 0:08:39.876 hundred years or two years, and that he was pulling 0:08:39.916 --> 0:08:42.276 the actual sentence out of his rear end rather than 0:08:42.316 --> 0:08:43.236 out of his calculator. 0:08:43.916 --> 0:08:44.836 Am I wrong about that? 0:08:45.956 --> 0:08:47.876 I don't think it comes out of a calculator, but 0:08:47.916 --> 0:08:51.836 I think it is more than just made up out 0:08:51.876 --> 0:08:53.876 of thin air. And I think that when we talk 0:08:53.916 --> 0:08:57.596 about what a person on the street would think, I 0:08:57.596 --> 0:09:00.276 think the way judges are often framing that is through 0:09:00.316 --> 0:09:02.796 what's called the thirty five to fifty three A factor. 0:09:02.956 --> 0:09:05.396 So there's the guidelines analysis, right, you have to do 0:09:05.476 --> 0:09:07.836 that math. In this case, as we know, it's spit 0:09:07.876 --> 0:09:10.156 out a recommended sentence of one hundred and ten years 0:09:10.356 --> 0:09:12.596 nobody thought that was the right sentence, not the government, 0:09:12.716 --> 0:09:15.476 not the probation department, not the judge, not defense Council, 0:09:16.236 --> 0:09:18.916 and then an imposing sentence. The judge has to consider 0:09:18.996 --> 0:09:22.236 these listed factors in eighteen USC. Thirty five to fifty 0:09:22.236 --> 0:09:25.956 three A, and those include things like the need for 0:09:26.196 --> 0:09:30.356 just punishment, the need for deterrence, the need for the 0:09:30.436 --> 0:09:33.876 sentence to reflect the seriousness of the offense, the need 0:09:34.036 --> 0:09:40.116 not to create unwarranted discrepancies disparities between similarly situated defendants. 0:09:40.196 --> 0:09:40.316 Right. 0:09:40.356 --> 0:09:42.596 So, and what I think when you think about all 0:09:42.596 --> 0:09:45.796 those factors together, what those do is, in a slightly 0:09:45.876 --> 0:09:50.676 less lawyer way than the math, they get at fundamental fairness, right, 0:09:50.716 --> 0:09:55.116 and the purposes of sentencing, which are a few right, deterrence, 0:09:55.316 --> 0:09:58.276 punishment in some cases. 0:09:58.596 --> 0:10:01.836 In coascitation. The judge in this case, if you have 0:10:01.836 --> 0:10:04.116 a chance to read what the judge said. 0:10:04.596 --> 0:10:07.156 He said, there is a real risk of reciities. 0:10:07.196 --> 0:10:08.836 That's my jaw was on the floor there, But that 0:10:08.916 --> 0:10:10.156 was that was I was interesting. 0:10:10.196 --> 0:10:12.236 It surprised me that he thought, Oh, if we don't 0:10:12.236 --> 0:10:13.956 put this man away for a long period time, he's 0:10:13.956 --> 0:10:17.236 going to come back and create another crypto exchange or whatever. 0:10:17.196 --> 0:10:22.196 But didn't Sam bankman Fried's statement make it sound like 0:10:22.276 --> 0:10:24.436 he would be someone who might come back and start 0:10:24.476 --> 0:10:25.636 another crypto exchange. 0:10:25.676 --> 0:10:29.356 If he could, the world wouldn't let him. 0:10:29.716 --> 0:10:33.036 So so I don't I don't think Sam would be 0:10:33.076 --> 0:10:35.876 given permission to start another crypto exchange. 0:10:35.876 --> 0:10:38.476 He probably he's probably be banned for finance, just for starters. 0:10:38.916 --> 0:10:44.636 So it seemed it just seems really unlikely that a person, 0:10:44.836 --> 0:10:46.836 this person would go do it all over again. 0:10:47.116 --> 0:10:50.396 But the judge was quite intent on this point. 0:10:50.676 --> 0:10:52.716 It was like, I think, I look at you, and 0:10:52.756 --> 0:10:54.236 I can already see how you're going to do it 0:10:54.276 --> 0:10:54.876 all over again. 0:10:55.796 --> 0:10:57.316 So I got to put you away for long enough 0:10:57.356 --> 0:10:58.076 that you can't do that. 0:10:59.236 --> 0:11:01.516 I have to say, I thought the government submission was 0:11:01.636 --> 0:11:03.996 very very strong in this case. I thought there were 0:11:03.996 --> 0:11:06.196 a lot of arguments that were very well made. I 0:11:06.276 --> 0:11:09.436 found that the weakest argument they made, I don't I 0:11:09.436 --> 0:11:12.556 don't think there's a realistic chance of him being a recidivist. 0:11:13.836 --> 0:11:16.236 That they had a whole site of prior cases where 0:11:16.276 --> 0:11:20.236 white collar defendants committed similar crimes after having been convicted. 0:11:20.556 --> 0:11:22.956 Strangely and by coincidence, many of those are cases I 0:11:23.036 --> 0:11:27.476 personally handled oddly enough. And the big difference there is 0:11:27.516 --> 0:11:29.956 those aren't cases where there was this kind of publicity, 0:11:31.476 --> 0:11:34.356 and so I don't think that that is actually a 0:11:34.476 --> 0:11:38.876 significant piece of what was necessary for sentencing. But I'm 0:11:38.876 --> 0:11:41.876 not the judge, and you the list of. 0:11:41.836 --> 0:11:44.716 Things to watch for or to listen for before we 0:11:44.796 --> 0:11:50.236 went in, you said you'd be listening for. How much 0:11:50.236 --> 0:11:55.956 focused the judge placed on Sam's perjury, how Sam had 0:11:55.956 --> 0:11:58.396 behaved on the stand was I think you might have 0:11:58.476 --> 0:12:03.916 mentioned had he shown remorse? They were all I found 0:12:04.036 --> 0:12:06.476 running through my head as he was approaching the sentence 0:12:06.516 --> 0:12:08.796 of twenty five years. As he's about to deliver that, 0:12:09.236 --> 0:12:11.796 and I was trying to I was thinking, how would 0:12:11.796 --> 0:12:15.116 the sentence have been affected if, for example, he hadn't 0:12:15.116 --> 0:12:15.916 purjured himself. 0:12:16.316 --> 0:12:17.996 What if you hadn't Let's replay this. 0:12:18.316 --> 0:12:20.596 I know you can't answer this question exactly, Rebecca, but 0:12:20.796 --> 0:12:21.796 let's just say Sam Beck. 0:12:21.676 --> 0:12:23.876 Mcfreed had been a completely different kind of defendant. 0:12:24.196 --> 0:12:27.636 If he just sat there quietly, looking sad, seeming sorrowful, 0:12:27.756 --> 0:12:31.716 feeling seeming remorseful in a way that was persuasive, and 0:12:31.876 --> 0:12:35.116 just took it, how much different would his sentence have been. 0:12:36.116 --> 0:12:41.716 It's obviously impossible to know. The guidelines give you a 0:12:41.716 --> 0:12:46.836 mathematical kind of suggestion, right, because perjuring yourself results in 0:12:46.876 --> 0:12:50.956 a two level enhancement, so failure to accept responsibility, right, 0:12:50.996 --> 0:12:53.716 hedd he pled guilty, that's a three level reduction. So 0:12:53.756 --> 0:12:57.076 you can do the math, but that doesn't get you anywhere, 0:12:57.396 --> 0:12:59.356 both because the loss here is so high that the 0:12:59.396 --> 0:13:02.556 math stays astronomical no matter what you do, and so 0:13:02.636 --> 0:13:05.796 it doesn't really help you, and because it's not that scientific. 0:13:07.196 --> 0:13:10.196 You know, if he had been extradited, shown up and 0:13:10.276 --> 0:13:12.756 said I did it, and I'm sorry, and I take 0:13:12.796 --> 0:13:15.076 full responsibility, and I want to plead guilty and do 0:13:15.116 --> 0:13:17.076 what I can to help the bankruptcy estate, what was 0:13:17.076 --> 0:13:19.996 he going to get in light of the twenty five 0:13:20.036 --> 0:13:23.796 years he did get? I say, twelve to fifteen. We'll 0:13:23.836 --> 0:13:25.156 never know, but we'll never know, right. 0:13:25.236 --> 0:13:27.796 I just wondered what that cost a lot? 0:13:28.276 --> 0:13:30.396 I think, do you think he could have gained anything 0:13:30.436 --> 0:13:33.876 off when he in his statement he said he was 0:13:33.916 --> 0:13:37.996 truly sorry, which he didn't really do, and sentencing. 0:13:37.556 --> 0:13:40.956 Today, I don't think it was likely to move the 0:13:40.996 --> 0:13:44.236 needle much at this point. I think that Michael is 0:13:44.396 --> 0:13:47.836 right that the judge, given the thoroughness of the briefing 0:13:47.916 --> 0:13:51.476 and the trial, had largely formed an opinion at this point, 0:13:51.556 --> 0:13:54.556 and so in the absence of something really surprising happening, 0:13:55.276 --> 0:13:57.276 he had sort of decided where this was going to go, 0:13:57.516 --> 0:14:01.556 and so saying at this point, I take full responsibility, 0:14:01.596 --> 0:14:05.116 not ultimately, I take responsibility for this, but I didn't 0:14:05.156 --> 0:14:07.396 do anything wrong, but I did do something wrong, and 0:14:07.436 --> 0:14:10.916 I admit that I committed crimes, and I'm sorry. I 0:14:10.956 --> 0:14:13.676 think there would be a too little, too late vibe 0:14:13.996 --> 0:14:17.116 and a sense that you're saying it now because you 0:14:17.156 --> 0:14:19.076 have no choice and it's your last dish effort. So 0:14:19.116 --> 0:14:20.956 I don't know that I think it would have been helpful. 0:14:20.956 --> 0:14:23.916 And of course he's hoping to appeal, and there are 0:14:23.956 --> 0:14:26.916 strategic reasons not to make that admission at this point 0:14:26.916 --> 0:14:28.716 in the game. So I don't know that I think 0:14:28.716 --> 0:14:31.436 it would have moved the needle. But I do think 0:14:31.836 --> 0:14:36.756 that had he earlier acknowledged responsibility. And this happens a 0:14:36.756 --> 0:14:38.996 lot actually with trials. Where a person goes to trial, 0:14:39.436 --> 0:14:43.156 they exercise their right. The judge understands that they wanted 0:14:43.196 --> 0:14:44.716 to put the government to its proof, but that it's 0:14:44.756 --> 0:14:47.836 sentencing the person accepts responsibility. I think it might have 0:14:47.876 --> 0:14:51.396 moved the needle. I think that a failure to admit 0:14:51.476 --> 0:14:56.076 your own criminal conduct feeds into the recidivism concern, because 0:14:56.116 --> 0:14:58.596 if you can't admit you did something wrong now, then 0:14:58.636 --> 0:14:59.836 how are you not going to do it next? 0:15:00.196 --> 0:15:03.076 But you think you'd at least fake it for the 0:15:03.316 --> 0:15:04.436 for the purposes of the trial. 0:15:04.876 --> 0:15:08.036 And Sam didn't even really fake it. 0:15:08.036 --> 0:15:11.196 It's so I have no next question. Two questions. 0:15:11.276 --> 0:15:14.356 First question is they had a victim. They allowed a 0:15:14.436 --> 0:15:15.556 victim to come and speak. 0:15:16.716 --> 0:15:17.276 The victim. 0:15:17.636 --> 0:15:20.756 I thought the purpose of the victim speaking was to 0:15:21.756 --> 0:15:23.436 enhance the prosecution's case. 0:15:23.716 --> 0:15:25.196 That seemed to be why he was there. 0:15:25.716 --> 0:15:28.676 But the victim got to the podium and just went 0:15:28.756 --> 0:15:30.436 on and on and on. 0:15:30.156 --> 0:15:32.116 About how the bankruptcy was stiffing him. 0:15:32.636 --> 0:15:35.636 Basically was a full throated attack on Sullivan and Cromwell 0:15:36.276 --> 0:15:37.636 and not on Sam Bekman Freed. 0:15:37.716 --> 0:15:39.556 It was like the guy was saying he was saying 0:15:39.596 --> 0:15:40.316 with Sam Began. 0:15:40.396 --> 0:15:43.196 Free was saying, the money's there, I want my money back, 0:15:43.676 --> 0:15:46.436 and these lawyers won't give it back to me. The 0:15:46.516 --> 0:15:49.196 judge finally silenced him and said this isn't bankruptcy court. 0:15:49.556 --> 0:15:51.916 But I would have thought the prosecutors would have vetted 0:15:52.316 --> 0:15:55.076 what the victim was going to say before he said, 0:15:55.396 --> 0:15:56.516 and that's not how it works. 0:15:57.836 --> 0:16:00.516 So it's interesting. I don't know what happened behind the 0:16:00.516 --> 0:16:05.196 scenes here. Obviously, victims of a crime have a statutory 0:16:05.276 --> 0:16:08.236 right to be heard at sentencing, So it is for 0:16:08.316 --> 0:16:14.356 sure truth that the government sometimes strategically invites victims or 0:16:14.436 --> 0:16:18.476 encourages victims to attend. But it is also certainly possible 0:16:18.596 --> 0:16:20.676 that the government did not intend to have any victims 0:16:20.716 --> 0:16:23.596 that's sentencing in this case. And this guy said he 0:16:23.636 --> 0:16:26.836 wanted to talk, and he's entitled, And given what you've 0:16:26.876 --> 0:16:29.076 just said, it sounds like it's just every. 0:16:28.876 --> 0:16:31.156 FTX victim could have showed up and insisted on speaking. 0:16:32.036 --> 0:16:34.636 As a practical matter. What would have happened if thousands 0:16:34.636 --> 0:16:36.876 of people had said they wanted to talk. I don't know, 0:16:36.956 --> 0:16:39.436 but I've never seen it happen. Yes, they each have 0:16:39.516 --> 0:16:41.076 a right. I've never seen it be a problem. 0:16:41.076 --> 0:16:46.156 Lord, that could get messy. So but the second thing 0:16:47.156 --> 0:16:50.476 I think the best the best. I'd love Ljay's take 0:16:50.516 --> 0:16:53.156 on this, But my favorite part of the theater was 0:16:53.196 --> 0:16:56.676 Judge Kaplan himself. He had almost a novelistic sense of 0:16:56.716 --> 0:16:59.596 the character that he had made. He made the kind 0:16:59.596 --> 0:17:02.436 of effort I make when I'm writing about someone to 0:17:02.556 --> 0:17:05.316 try to really get to know that person. And at 0:17:05.316 --> 0:17:08.956 one point, when he's talking about why Bankminfreed might come 0:17:08.956 --> 0:17:11.276 out out and do it all over again, he used 0:17:11.276 --> 0:17:15.596 the phrase it's his nature, and it was like he 0:17:15.636 --> 0:17:17.756 felt like he had gotten to the nub of Sam 0:17:17.796 --> 0:17:20.116 Beckman Freek's character. And I don't think he was far off. 0:17:20.836 --> 0:17:23.476 I think he actually put his finger on on the thing. 0:17:24.916 --> 0:17:26.596 And does that happen? 0:17:27.396 --> 0:17:27.596 Was that? 0:17:27.636 --> 0:17:29.756 Did I just witness something that was really unusual in 0:17:29.756 --> 0:17:32.676 a courtroom? Or are they judges actually do this kind 0:17:32.716 --> 0:17:35.956 of thing where they actually kind of take part, piece 0:17:36.036 --> 0:17:38.676 by piece the defendant's character. 0:17:39.836 --> 0:17:41.996 I think it's common. I don't think it happens in 0:17:42.036 --> 0:17:45.316 every case. It's dependent on the judge and the personalities 0:17:45.396 --> 0:17:49.956 and the crime itself. Some crimes don't lend themselves. They're 0:17:49.996 --> 0:17:53.116 not long, big picture, ongoing things. There are crimes of 0:17:53.156 --> 0:17:55.396 a moment, and so this kind of deep analysis of 0:17:55.436 --> 0:17:59.076 personality and what kind of person does this you wouldn't see. 0:17:59.156 --> 0:18:02.156 But I don't think it's uncommon to see a judge 0:18:02.556 --> 0:18:05.716 really try to look at the whole picture. And I 0:18:05.796 --> 0:18:08.236 think that's part of the job of a judge. At sentencing, 0:18:08.516 --> 0:18:12.236 you'll hear judges often say, you know you are not 0:18:12.876 --> 0:18:14.956 the worst thing you did, and my job is to 0:18:14.996 --> 0:18:18.636 consider not just the criminal conduct here, but who you 0:18:18.716 --> 0:18:21.796 are as a person, what are the good things in 0:18:21.836 --> 0:18:24.556 your life? People are complicated, right, you could be the 0:18:24.596 --> 0:18:28.036 best father in the world, and also, you know, a 0:18:28.116 --> 0:18:30.516 terrible criminal. So I don't think it's unusual to hear 0:18:30.596 --> 0:18:33.836 judges do that kind of analysis. Given how long this 0:18:33.956 --> 0:18:35.636 case has gone on and how long the trial was 0:18:35.676 --> 0:18:37.916 and all the kind of bumps, this judge has a 0:18:37.956 --> 0:18:40.236 lot more to work with in making that analysis than 0:18:40.276 --> 0:18:42.956 sometimes happens where a person might you know, get arrested 0:18:42.956 --> 0:18:45.156 and appear in front of the judge, appear at the 0:18:45.196 --> 0:18:47.876 plea and then appear at sentencing and the only thing 0:18:47.876 --> 0:18:51.196 the judge has to work from is sentencing submissions and 0:18:51.556 --> 0:18:53.436 the PSR. But no, I don't think it's. 0:18:53.356 --> 0:18:55.396 Uncommon, LJ. What were your favorite moments? 0:18:55.876 --> 0:18:58.596 I mean, I definitely I thought it was really interesting 0:18:58.636 --> 0:19:02.556 to hear from Judge Kaplin because I think he for 0:19:02.636 --> 0:19:04.916 the entirety of the trial, it had to hold back 0:19:05.116 --> 0:19:07.116 on what he was thinking and how he was viewing 0:19:07.116 --> 0:19:10.116 the story, and then this was finally his opportunity to 0:19:10.356 --> 0:19:13.316 kind of say, this is what I saw and this 0:19:13.356 --> 0:19:17.556 is how I feel about it. But he also kind 0:19:17.596 --> 0:19:20.236 of summed up the story when he talked about the 0:19:20.236 --> 0:19:22.436 coin flip that we also talked about in the podcast, 0:19:23.276 --> 0:19:25.836 and it's just something that really sticks with you when 0:19:25.876 --> 0:19:30.516 he said that Caroline had this anecdote about how Sam 0:19:30.556 --> 0:19:32.396 said that if he had if there was a coin 0:19:32.956 --> 0:19:34.676 and if you flipped it, one way, the world would 0:19:34.716 --> 0:19:37.076 be two times better and the other way the world 0:19:37.116 --> 0:19:40.156 would be destroyed. And Sam said he would choose to 0:19:40.196 --> 0:19:41.436 flip because. 0:19:41.276 --> 0:19:42.956 It had positive expected value. 0:19:43.356 --> 0:19:45.756 It was more likely there's a slightly better chance that 0:19:45.796 --> 0:19:47.956 the world could be better. And I think that's kind 0:19:47.956 --> 0:19:51.916 of what Judge Coplin was saying, was like Sam's fatal flaw. 0:19:52.036 --> 0:19:55.436 I agree with that it is, and the nub of 0:19:55.476 --> 0:19:58.076 his crime is is not it's theft. 0:19:58.116 --> 0:19:59.596