WEBVTT - Judging Sam: The jury's job

0:00:15.356 --> 0:00:25.276
<v Speaker 1>Push him. I'm lydigen Kott. It's the evening of November first,

0:00:26.116 --> 0:00:30.836
<v Speaker 1>and today we had closing arguments. The prosecutor, Nicholas Rose,

0:00:31.396 --> 0:00:35.036
<v Speaker 1>started by saying that Sam Bankman Freed used customer funds,

0:00:35.836 --> 0:00:37.916
<v Speaker 1>that he knew it was wrong, and that he thought

0:00:37.956 --> 0:00:40.236
<v Speaker 1>he could get away with it because he was smart.

0:00:41.276 --> 0:00:44.316
<v Speaker 1>That ends with you, Rose told the members of the jury.

0:00:45.676 --> 0:00:49.956
<v Speaker 1>Mark Cohen, Sam Bankman Freed's defense attorney, also focused on

0:00:49.996 --> 0:00:54.716
<v Speaker 1>Sam's intent. He reminded the jury that quote good faith

0:00:55.436 --> 0:00:59.436
<v Speaker 1>is a complete defense against all the charges, and he

0:00:59.596 --> 0:01:03.196
<v Speaker 1>also cast out on the testimony of the cooperating witnesses

0:01:03.956 --> 0:01:06.436
<v Speaker 1>if they were all in a criminal conspiracy together. He

0:01:06.556 --> 0:01:09.556
<v Speaker 1>asked how come they all found out that Alanma was

0:01:09.636 --> 0:01:14.436
<v Speaker 1>using customer funds at different times in different ways. As

0:01:14.476 --> 0:01:17.516
<v Speaker 1>Cohen was finishing up, I noticed that for the first

0:01:17.556 --> 0:01:20.156
<v Speaker 1>time in a while, Sam Bankman Freed wasn't typing on

0:01:20.196 --> 0:01:23.516
<v Speaker 1>his laptop, and I could see his face. It looked

0:01:23.556 --> 0:01:26.756
<v Speaker 1>like he was looking behind him a little bit, maybe

0:01:26.836 --> 0:01:30.316
<v Speaker 1>towards his parents, and he was blinking rapidly like he

0:01:30.436 --> 0:01:33.556
<v Speaker 1>was crying. So now we're in the next phase of

0:01:33.556 --> 0:01:36.716
<v Speaker 1>the trial. A rebuttal from the prosecution, and then the

0:01:36.796 --> 0:01:39.156
<v Speaker 1>judge will instruct the jury and then the jury is

0:01:39.196 --> 0:01:42.476
<v Speaker 1>going to go off and begin deliberations. Though the rest

0:01:42.516 --> 0:01:46.156
<v Speaker 1>of the trial happens in public. For deliberations, the twelve

0:01:46.156 --> 0:01:48.276
<v Speaker 1>members of the jury will file into a back room

0:01:48.476 --> 0:01:51.756
<v Speaker 1>away from the reporters and even the judge. I wanted

0:01:51.756 --> 0:01:53.756
<v Speaker 1>to know more about what goes on in that room,

0:01:53.836 --> 0:01:56.236
<v Speaker 1>So a week or so ago I called up Ellan Leggett.

0:01:56.556 --> 0:01:58.916
<v Speaker 1>You might remember her from one of our first episodes.

0:01:59.476 --> 0:02:03.556
<v Speaker 1>She's a trial consultant and a psychologist, and she specializes

0:02:03.596 --> 0:02:07.316
<v Speaker 1>in helping lawyers select juries in cases. Ellen, welcome back

0:02:07.356 --> 0:02:07.796
<v Speaker 1>to the show.

0:02:08.676 --> 0:02:10.436
<v Speaker 2>Thank you well, Jake, glad to be here.

0:02:10.876 --> 0:02:14.036
<v Speaker 1>What I want to know about is what happens during

0:02:14.196 --> 0:02:18.956
<v Speaker 1>jury deliberations. So what I know is that the jury

0:02:19.236 --> 0:02:22.796
<v Speaker 1>leaves the courtroom and then I think they go to

0:02:23.076 --> 0:02:26.436
<v Speaker 1>another room and then what happens? What are they doing there?

0:02:27.396 --> 0:02:31.116
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that's behind closed doors and no one gets to

0:02:31.196 --> 0:02:33.716
<v Speaker 2>really be a fly on the wall and there, although

0:02:33.756 --> 0:02:37.196
<v Speaker 2>we all wish we could be. My ability to see

0:02:37.196 --> 0:02:39.116
<v Speaker 2>what goes on in that room is because I've done

0:02:39.196 --> 0:02:43.796
<v Speaker 2>many many mock trials when seen jurors deliberate in mock settings.

0:02:44.036 --> 0:02:47.596
<v Speaker 2>And I've also talked to many jurors after they've deliberated,

0:02:47.836 --> 0:02:50.676
<v Speaker 2>and I've interviewed them extensively about what happened in the

0:02:50.716 --> 0:02:54.996
<v Speaker 2>jury room. So what do they do? Well, Interestingly, one

0:02:54.996 --> 0:02:58.596
<v Speaker 2>of the first things that they do is elect a

0:02:58.676 --> 0:03:04.756
<v Speaker 2>four person and the process for that is interesting because

0:03:05.316 --> 0:03:09.556
<v Speaker 2>there has been a bond developed during the time that

0:03:09.596 --> 0:03:13.276
<v Speaker 2>these jurors have all been sitting together and having lunch

0:03:13.316 --> 0:03:17.596
<v Speaker 2>together and taking breaks together. And someone has usually emerged

0:03:17.756 --> 0:03:20.196
<v Speaker 2>as the person to recommend where they go to lunch

0:03:20.236 --> 0:03:24.796
<v Speaker 2>that day or something, you know, but that person they

0:03:24.876 --> 0:03:28.116
<v Speaker 2>might turn to as someone that could be the jury

0:03:28.156 --> 0:03:32.236
<v Speaker 2>for person, and yet someone else may have really strong

0:03:32.276 --> 0:03:35.916
<v Speaker 2>opinions and want to insert themselves as a candidate. But

0:03:36.156 --> 0:03:40.116
<v Speaker 2>as they first get settled in, they are for the

0:03:40.156 --> 0:03:42.916
<v Speaker 2>first time able to talk freely with each other, and

0:03:42.996 --> 0:03:46.156
<v Speaker 2>there's kind of a breath of you know, taking a

0:03:46.196 --> 0:03:48.956
<v Speaker 2>deep breath and saying, wow, what have we been through here?

0:03:49.076 --> 0:03:50.596
<v Speaker 2>This has been something.

0:03:51.076 --> 0:03:53.236
<v Speaker 1>Because up until now they haven't been allowed to talk

0:03:53.276 --> 0:03:55.516
<v Speaker 1>about the case, not each other, not at all.

0:03:55.596 --> 0:03:59.836
<v Speaker 2>And many people ask do I think jurors really maintain

0:04:00.156 --> 0:04:04.476
<v Speaker 2>that distance? And I believe for the most part, jurors do,

0:04:05.276 --> 0:04:09.356
<v Speaker 2>especially in a high profile case like this. They don't

0:04:09.356 --> 0:04:12.476
<v Speaker 2>want to do anything that could create a mistrial or

0:04:12.636 --> 0:04:15.076
<v Speaker 2>upset the apple cart when there has been so much

0:04:15.116 --> 0:04:18.356
<v Speaker 2>publicity and so much time invested in this trial.

0:04:18.916 --> 0:04:22.836
<v Speaker 1>So they're in this room, they vote for a four person.

0:04:23.196 --> 0:04:26.916
<v Speaker 1>There's twelve of them, so what if it's a tie.

0:04:27.516 --> 0:04:29.796
<v Speaker 2>There's no rule for how they pick a four person,

0:04:30.356 --> 0:04:34.716
<v Speaker 2>and they sometimes will do a secret ballot and sometimes

0:04:34.796 --> 0:04:38.356
<v Speaker 2>just somebody volunteers. Often it's a person who may have

0:04:38.876 --> 0:04:42.436
<v Speaker 2>some expertise that everyone thinks, oh, you'll be the best

0:04:42.436 --> 0:04:45.436
<v Speaker 2>four person. You've been a juror five times before, or

0:04:45.476 --> 0:04:50.996
<v Speaker 2>you've had experience in banking or something that might yeah. Seen.

0:04:51.156 --> 0:04:53.556
<v Speaker 1>It's interesting you say that, because, yeah, on this jury

0:04:53.556 --> 0:04:56.516
<v Speaker 1>there's one person who has they used to work for

0:04:56.676 --> 0:05:00.356
<v Speaker 1>Solomon Brothers. He has some experience in finance. So do

0:05:00.396 --> 0:05:02.996
<v Speaker 1>you think there's no way to tell but he seems

0:05:03.036 --> 0:05:03.436
<v Speaker 1>like he could.

0:05:03.556 --> 0:05:07.476
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it could be that jurors feel that they would

0:05:07.556 --> 0:05:11.396
<v Speaker 2>have more trust someone that seems like they've got some

0:05:11.476 --> 0:05:15.236
<v Speaker 2>industry experience or insight. So that could very well be

0:05:15.676 --> 0:05:18.236
<v Speaker 2>instead of the person who's picked. Where they go to

0:05:18.316 --> 0:05:19.316
<v Speaker 2>lunch every day.

0:05:21.396 --> 0:05:23.156
<v Speaker 1>And then what happens they have their for a person,

0:05:23.236 --> 0:05:26.036
<v Speaker 1>do they get all the transcripts?

0:05:26.476 --> 0:05:30.356
<v Speaker 2>There will be boxes of exhibits in the room, no doubt,

0:05:30.596 --> 0:05:35.036
<v Speaker 2>although electronic records are also available to them sometimes, but

0:05:35.476 --> 0:05:39.236
<v Speaker 2>they have the ability to ask for anything that they

0:05:39.316 --> 0:05:43.516
<v Speaker 2>want to see. But quite honestly, they will start by

0:05:43.876 --> 0:05:47.276
<v Speaker 2>generally reading the first question on the verdict form if

0:05:47.316 --> 0:05:49.916
<v Speaker 2>they're a good jury form, and they'll read the entire

0:05:50.036 --> 0:05:56.796
<v Speaker 2>verdict form again. And what often happens, even though we think, oh,

0:05:56.836 --> 0:06:00.316
<v Speaker 2>they're going to take their time, they often just take

0:06:01.076 --> 0:06:04.196
<v Speaker 2>a show of hands right away. How many people think

0:06:04.236 --> 0:06:07.676
<v Speaker 2>he's guilty? They do that in spite of the fact

0:06:07.716 --> 0:06:09.836
<v Speaker 2>that they know they've got to answer all these questions

0:06:10.196 --> 0:06:13.596
<v Speaker 2>on a verdict form. But they like often four persons

0:06:13.636 --> 0:06:16.036
<v Speaker 2>want to take the temperature of the room, and this

0:06:16.196 --> 0:06:18.756
<v Speaker 2>is the first time they will have an indication of

0:06:18.836 --> 0:06:22.396
<v Speaker 2>how the people they've been with for all these weeks

0:06:22.916 --> 0:06:28.356
<v Speaker 2>really thinks. So it's often a surprise when they do

0:06:28.556 --> 0:06:33.756
<v Speaker 2>their very first show of hands vote. Sometimes it's surprise

0:06:34.396 --> 0:06:39.196
<v Speaker 2>that people who perceive themselves to be friendly suddenly see

0:06:39.196 --> 0:06:42.236
<v Speaker 2>that they're on opposite sides of the case. And dynamics

0:06:42.276 --> 0:06:46.876
<v Speaker 2>within this group can change a lot, so I would

0:06:46.916 --> 0:06:48.476
<v Speaker 2>predict that one of the first things they will do

0:06:48.516 --> 0:06:50.956
<v Speaker 2>after they get a four person is probably take a

0:06:50.956 --> 0:06:53.636
<v Speaker 2>show of hands vote how many people think he's guilty.

0:06:54.436 --> 0:06:56.716
<v Speaker 1>If they all think he's guilty, are they done?

0:06:56.796 --> 0:07:01.076
<v Speaker 2>Oh? Yeah, they think they might be, But no, they

0:07:01.196 --> 0:07:04.796
<v Speaker 2>have questions. There are seven counts here, so they will

0:07:04.836 --> 0:07:08.596
<v Speaker 2>need to go through each count and take a vote

0:07:08.596 --> 0:07:13.956
<v Speaker 2>and eat one, and a good foreman will make sure

0:07:13.996 --> 0:07:18.116
<v Speaker 2>that there is discussion about each one. And again I'm

0:07:18.156 --> 0:07:20.796
<v Speaker 2>thinking that because this is such a high profile case,

0:07:21.436 --> 0:07:25.516
<v Speaker 2>they will want to discuss, and the jury foreman will

0:07:25.556 --> 0:07:29.356
<v Speaker 2>want to have people discuss, so that even if they

0:07:29.716 --> 0:07:32.356
<v Speaker 2>were able to go through all seven questions right away

0:07:32.436 --> 0:07:35.556
<v Speaker 2>and take votes right away, if they didn't discuss anything,

0:07:35.676 --> 0:07:39.516
<v Speaker 2>I doubt they would feel good about their verdict because

0:07:39.556 --> 0:07:41.836
<v Speaker 2>in my experienced, jurors want to do the right thing,

0:07:42.796 --> 0:07:46.596
<v Speaker 2>especially on a case that's important. They're going to want

0:07:46.676 --> 0:07:50.156
<v Speaker 2>to have the perception that they have worked hard and

0:07:50.196 --> 0:07:52.876
<v Speaker 2>that they have done a good job judging.

0:07:52.956 --> 0:08:02.156
<v Speaker 1>Sam will be right back. We're back. I wanted to

0:08:02.196 --> 0:08:05.236
<v Speaker 1>talk to you about this jury specifically because now we

0:08:05.316 --> 0:08:08.236
<v Speaker 1>know some things about them. Nine of the twelve are women.

0:08:09.116 --> 0:08:11.476
<v Speaker 1>The oldest member of the jury is sixty nine and

0:08:11.516 --> 0:08:14.996
<v Speaker 1>the youngest is thirty three, and the average age is

0:08:15.076 --> 0:08:17.996
<v Speaker 1>about fifty one. What do you think about just that

0:08:18.076 --> 0:08:19.556
<v Speaker 1>basic demographic data.

0:08:20.196 --> 0:08:24.636
<v Speaker 2>I think that having the women is interesting because women

0:08:24.916 --> 0:08:31.956
<v Speaker 2>are often stereotypically the more sympathetic to defendants. You know,

0:08:31.996 --> 0:08:35.716
<v Speaker 2>that might have been something that the defense was trying

0:08:35.836 --> 0:08:41.236
<v Speaker 2>to play towards. Women may also have less interest generally

0:08:41.516 --> 0:08:45.276
<v Speaker 2>in this kind of investing, and maybe they were all

0:08:45.476 --> 0:08:49.836
<v Speaker 2>thinking that women will bring less baggage to this case,

0:08:49.956 --> 0:08:55.396
<v Speaker 2>which would explain why you know, a more majority of

0:08:55.436 --> 0:08:56.436
<v Speaker 2>the jurors are women.

0:08:57.516 --> 0:09:01.876
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's interesting though, because after Caroline Allison testified, I

0:09:01.916 --> 0:09:04.756
<v Speaker 1>overheard a lot of reporters saying, wow, Sam Magmond, Fred

0:09:04.836 --> 0:09:07.036
<v Speaker 1>really reminds me of a bad boyfriend that I had.

0:09:09.396 --> 0:09:11.356
<v Speaker 1>I wonder, Yeah, it seems like it could play the

0:09:11.396 --> 0:09:12.956
<v Speaker 1>other way as well. Do you want to hear a

0:09:12.996 --> 0:09:15.436
<v Speaker 1>little bit about some of their jobs. Yeah, we have

0:09:15.836 --> 0:09:20.796
<v Speaker 1>a physician assistant who's pregnant. We have a nurse, a

0:09:20.836 --> 0:09:26.276
<v Speaker 1>social worker, someone who used to work in nonprofits, a

0:09:26.356 --> 0:09:31.076
<v Speaker 1>Metro North train conductor, a high school librarian, a corrections officer,

0:09:31.916 --> 0:09:37.476
<v Speaker 1>postal service employee, someone from Ukraine who did it at Bloomberg.

0:09:38.356 --> 0:09:42.956
<v Speaker 1>A special education teacher and the retired investment banker.

0:09:44.756 --> 0:09:48.156
<v Speaker 2>Very interesting. So a lot of people in the medical

0:09:48.196 --> 0:09:52.316
<v Speaker 2>and nonprofit area, which again is kind of I actually

0:09:52.356 --> 0:09:55.916
<v Speaker 2>would have predicted that because they are so far removed

0:09:55.996 --> 0:09:59.396
<v Speaker 2>from the type of content that this case is about.

0:09:59.916 --> 0:10:04.156
<v Speaker 2>The postal worker and the metro train operator. Those are

0:10:04.196 --> 0:10:09.556
<v Speaker 2>pretty typical folks on juris in criminal cases because they

0:10:09.596 --> 0:10:12.396
<v Speaker 2>get to serve on long juries and get paid for

0:10:12.436 --> 0:10:13.516
<v Speaker 2>their jury service.

0:10:13.876 --> 0:10:15.196
<v Speaker 1>Those people and retired.

0:10:14.876 --> 0:10:18.676
<v Speaker 2>People and retired people, Yeah, exactly. A special ed person

0:10:18.796 --> 0:10:22.956
<v Speaker 2>is kind of interesting because certainly there have been many

0:10:23.036 --> 0:10:27.756
<v Speaker 2>characterizations of Sam bankmin Freed as being somewhat off center

0:10:28.116 --> 0:10:34.756
<v Speaker 2>in his style, whether it's emotionally, cognitively, interpersonally. So a

0:10:34.836 --> 0:10:37.796
<v Speaker 2>special ed teacher may have a broader range of accepted

0:10:37.836 --> 0:10:43.036
<v Speaker 2>behaviors and could be someone who would bring that to

0:10:43.116 --> 0:10:47.116
<v Speaker 2>the jury in a way that could be helpful to him.

0:10:47.956 --> 0:10:52.036
<v Speaker 1>I'm curious, as someone who has, you know, experienced with

0:10:52.076 --> 0:10:54.796
<v Speaker 1>lots of different trials, do you have any sort of

0:10:54.996 --> 0:10:58.076
<v Speaker 1>guess for how long we deliberations might last.

0:10:59.116 --> 0:11:02.436
<v Speaker 2>I've played this through a couple of different ways. I

0:11:02.476 --> 0:11:04.796
<v Speaker 2>think that as I've said, I don't think they will

0:11:04.836 --> 0:11:08.916
<v Speaker 2>want to be forming a quick verdict and rendering it.

0:11:09.116 --> 0:11:11.356
<v Speaker 2>There are seven counts. They will do a good job.

0:11:11.476 --> 0:11:14.076
<v Speaker 2>They will take I think the better part of a

0:11:14.196 --> 0:11:14.956
<v Speaker 2>day or two.

0:11:15.476 --> 0:11:18.276
<v Speaker 1>The other thing I was wondering about is this case

0:11:18.316 --> 0:11:21.076
<v Speaker 1>has a lot of different layers to it, right. It

0:11:21.156 --> 0:11:24.756
<v Speaker 1>has a technical layer to it where we've talked a

0:11:24.756 --> 0:11:29.676
<v Speaker 1>lot about, you know, how exactly trading works, where different

0:11:29.716 --> 0:11:32.116
<v Speaker 1>money was and how it was held. And then it

0:11:32.116 --> 0:11:35.636
<v Speaker 1>also has an interpersonal aspect to it about Sam Magmnfreed's

0:11:35.676 --> 0:11:38.476
<v Speaker 1>relationship with his friends who worked at the company with

0:11:38.516 --> 0:11:40.716
<v Speaker 1>his ex girlfriend. I mean, I know this is a

0:11:40.716 --> 0:11:43.596
<v Speaker 1>hard question, but what do you think is most important

0:11:43.636 --> 0:11:44.956
<v Speaker 1>to the jurors or what do you think that they're

0:11:44.956 --> 0:11:48.516
<v Speaker 1>thinking about when they're in the in the jury room.

0:11:49.356 --> 0:11:52.356
<v Speaker 2>I think they're trying to determine who told the truth,

0:11:53.636 --> 0:11:58.196
<v Speaker 2>and therefore the relationships that all these people had with

0:11:59.036 --> 0:12:05.676
<v Speaker 2>Sam megmun Freed becomes very relevant and their testimony is significant.

0:12:05.956 --> 0:12:10.556
<v Speaker 2>So I think they're thinking, given these folks that knew

0:12:10.636 --> 0:12:14.756
<v Speaker 2>him well, that knew him not just in this professional

0:12:14.836 --> 0:12:19.276
<v Speaker 2>role but also in college in high school, what were

0:12:19.316 --> 0:12:23.996
<v Speaker 2>their relationships and how believable was their testimony. I think

0:12:24.036 --> 0:12:27.716
<v Speaker 2>they will be thinking a lot about intent, and that's

0:12:27.716 --> 0:12:32.956
<v Speaker 2>a psychological variable. Really, it's not a technical one to

0:12:33.116 --> 0:12:37.476
<v Speaker 2>determine intent. They're talking about what did he say, what

0:12:37.596 --> 0:12:42.516
<v Speaker 2>did he do, who did he intend to harm, if anyone?

0:12:43.236 --> 0:12:47.796
<v Speaker 2>And that's really trying to get inside his psychology, not

0:12:47.916 --> 0:12:49.516
<v Speaker 2>inside the technology here.

0:12:50.596 --> 0:12:52.836
<v Speaker 1>And what impact do you think it'll have that he

0:12:52.916 --> 0:12:56.276
<v Speaker 1>actually took the stand, which is really rare in criminal cases.

0:12:56.196 --> 0:13:04.756
<v Speaker 2>Very rare, and yet someone who is as oblivious to

0:13:05.956 --> 0:13:11.636
<v Speaker 2>truth as he is, it lives on making a judgment there.

0:13:11.996 --> 0:13:15.916
<v Speaker 2>But that's really how it has come across. Even Carolin

0:13:15.956 --> 0:13:20.596
<v Speaker 2>Allison had said he seemed to have very little attachment

0:13:20.676 --> 0:13:23.956
<v Speaker 2>to the mores that most people have and that she

0:13:24.196 --> 0:13:28.076
<v Speaker 2>learned how to lie better by being in that environment.

0:13:28.196 --> 0:13:29.116
<v Speaker 2>It was a culture.

0:13:29.836 --> 0:13:33.356
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and you're saying that the fact that this idea

0:13:33.396 --> 0:13:36.076
<v Speaker 1>has been kind of seated by the prosecution that he's

0:13:36.076 --> 0:13:39.556
<v Speaker 1>not the most trustworthy person, is going to make the

0:13:39.556 --> 0:13:42.316
<v Speaker 1>fact that he took the stand maybe not make that

0:13:42.436 --> 0:13:44.756
<v Speaker 1>much of a difference to the jury when they're deliberating.

0:13:45.356 --> 0:13:47.396
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think that it will be definitely it will

0:13:47.436 --> 0:13:50.916
<v Speaker 2>be talked about, and I know Michael had said he

0:13:51.036 --> 0:13:55.396
<v Speaker 2>predicted jurors would feel different about him after they've heard

0:13:55.476 --> 0:13:58.956
<v Speaker 2>him talk. That may very well be true. But will

0:13:58.996 --> 0:14:03.436
<v Speaker 2>they feel different enough to overcome what appears to have

0:14:03.556 --> 0:14:10.796
<v Speaker 2>been a very strong prosecution case with very convincing insider witnesses.

0:14:11.636 --> 0:14:13.716
<v Speaker 1>And what happens if the jury isn't able to reach

0:14:13.716 --> 0:14:14.236
<v Speaker 1>a decision.

0:14:15.396 --> 0:14:20.596
<v Speaker 2>That is what everyone worries about, that the jury cannot

0:14:20.836 --> 0:14:26.556
<v Speaker 2>be unanimous. Actually, who worries about that most the prosecution,

0:14:27.076 --> 0:14:31.756
<v Speaker 2>because if the jury is not unanimous, Sam Megmanfried is

0:14:31.876 --> 0:14:37.236
<v Speaker 2>not convicted, and that is a win for the defense.

0:14:38.156 --> 0:14:43.396
<v Speaker 2>If they're not unanimous, one question that is interesting to

0:14:43.436 --> 0:14:45.636
<v Speaker 2>think about is what do they do and what are

0:14:45.676 --> 0:14:50.196
<v Speaker 2>the signs that they may not be unanimous? And I've

0:14:50.236 --> 0:14:54.236
<v Speaker 2>said that they could take a day, if not longer,

0:14:54.396 --> 0:14:58.836
<v Speaker 2>even if they are unanimous, because they're going through everything

0:14:58.956 --> 0:15:00.996
<v Speaker 2>that they can. This is a case where they could

0:15:01.036 --> 0:15:03.756
<v Speaker 2>be competed if they were to be on opposite sides.

0:15:03.796 --> 0:15:07.556
<v Speaker 2>I think because there is so much at stake for

0:15:07.716 --> 0:15:12.396
<v Speaker 2>him as a defendant. There's so much loss that was

0:15:12.836 --> 0:15:15.836
<v Speaker 2>suffered by so many people. There are so many high

0:15:15.916 --> 0:15:19.756
<v Speaker 2>profile individuals in the world that were taken in by

0:15:19.836 --> 0:15:25.796
<v Speaker 2>him that I think all of that could create passion

0:15:25.876 --> 0:15:29.356
<v Speaker 2>on both sides if there were a division of opinion.

0:15:30.316 --> 0:15:33.116
<v Speaker 2>How they work it out. Often they may send out

0:15:33.196 --> 0:15:36.636
<v Speaker 2>questions to the judge that they may want to see

0:15:36.716 --> 0:15:41.996
<v Speaker 2>video deposition played again. They could also be wanting to

0:15:42.596 --> 0:15:47.276
<v Speaker 2>see exhibits that maybe they can't find. They can ask

0:15:47.396 --> 0:15:52.236
<v Speaker 2>specific questions about interpretation of instructions and the law. And

0:15:52.476 --> 0:15:56.396
<v Speaker 2>whenever they send out a question, the judge will call

0:15:56.636 --> 0:16:01.796
<v Speaker 2>the lawyers into the courtroom and they will have a

0:16:02.036 --> 0:16:05.996
<v Speaker 2>conference about what the jury question is. They will discuss it,

0:16:06.596 --> 0:16:09.196
<v Speaker 2>how they should handle it, how they should answer it,

0:16:09.516 --> 0:16:13.356
<v Speaker 2>and the judge will decide how to answer it, and

0:16:13.396 --> 0:16:16.116
<v Speaker 2>they will send an answer back in. But because they

0:16:16.156 --> 0:16:18.756
<v Speaker 2>have different charges, they have to reach a verdict on

0:16:18.876 --> 0:16:24.916
<v Speaker 2>each question. And they may be unanimous on question one,

0:16:25.276 --> 0:16:29.636
<v Speaker 2>but then question two they're not unanimous, and they keep discussing,

0:16:29.676 --> 0:16:31.996
<v Speaker 2>and they may say, you know what, let's skip this

0:16:32.076 --> 0:16:35.156
<v Speaker 2>one and let's go to the next one. And they

0:16:35.196 --> 0:16:39.476
<v Speaker 2>will make their way through the questions and then sort

0:16:39.516 --> 0:16:42.076
<v Speaker 2>of see where it all nets out and go back

0:16:42.116 --> 0:16:44.716
<v Speaker 2>to the ones that they maybe weren't unanimous on at

0:16:44.756 --> 0:16:45.236
<v Speaker 2>the beginning.

0:16:46.436 --> 0:16:53.236
<v Speaker 1>We'll be back in a minute with one last thing. Okay,

0:16:53.516 --> 0:16:56.756
<v Speaker 1>we're back Ellen. I was told that there is this

0:16:56.996 --> 0:17:00.596
<v Speaker 1>belief that when the jurors come back from deliberations, if

0:17:00.596 --> 0:17:02.756
<v Speaker 1>they look at the judge, that means that they're going

0:17:02.796 --> 0:17:06.156
<v Speaker 1>to convict, and if they look at the defendant, that

0:17:06.276 --> 0:17:09.196
<v Speaker 1>means that they're going to acquit. Do you think they're

0:17:09.516 --> 0:17:10.316
<v Speaker 1>any truth to that.

0:17:11.476 --> 0:17:13.836
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to say no, I'm not a believer in

0:17:13.876 --> 0:17:16.596
<v Speaker 2>that urban myth. I'm actually not too much of a

0:17:16.636 --> 0:17:19.476
<v Speaker 2>believer that you can tell much from the jurors facial

0:17:19.556 --> 0:17:23.956
<v Speaker 2>expressions ever in court. And the reason for that, although

0:17:23.956 --> 0:17:26.796
<v Speaker 2>I love to watch the jurors in court like anyone else,

0:17:27.276 --> 0:17:30.316
<v Speaker 2>but jurors know that they're in a fishbowl and that

0:17:30.636 --> 0:17:36.596
<v Speaker 2>everyone is observing them, and they can deliberately put on

0:17:37.036 --> 0:17:41.356
<v Speaker 2>a neutral face and agree before they walk into the

0:17:41.396 --> 0:17:45.716
<v Speaker 2>courtroom let's not look at the defendant no matter what.

0:17:46.516 --> 0:17:51.316
<v Speaker 2>And they can have little packs like that that are

0:17:51.556 --> 0:17:55.196
<v Speaker 2>protecting them from the scrutiny that they feel they are under.

0:17:55.916 --> 0:17:58.876
<v Speaker 2>So I wouldn't put a lot of stock in where

0:17:58.916 --> 0:18:01.396
<v Speaker 2>they look when they walk out. And by the way,

0:18:01.436 --> 0:18:03.636
<v Speaker 2>I know there was one other thing I wanted to mention.

0:18:04.156 --> 0:18:07.076
<v Speaker 2>You had said at one point early on, you felt

0:18:07.116 --> 0:18:09.156
<v Speaker 2>like sitting in the courtroom was like sitting in a

0:18:09.276 --> 0:18:13.996
<v Speaker 2>church pew, very formal and so forth. And the jurors

0:18:14.076 --> 0:18:16.876
<v Speaker 2>don't think that they think that this is their living room.

0:18:17.796 --> 0:18:23.076
<v Speaker 2>They have been sitting in that courtroom for weeks and

0:18:23.476 --> 0:18:28.556
<v Speaker 2>they're very familiar. Jury Service imposes upon them rules that

0:18:28.596 --> 0:18:32.196
<v Speaker 2>are so different from their normal habits. They've been given

0:18:32.276 --> 0:18:36.916
<v Speaker 2>permission to take a vacation from our sabbatical from their job.

0:18:37.476 --> 0:18:41.476
<v Speaker 2>Jurors can sometimes find this experience to be very empowering,

0:18:42.036 --> 0:18:44.956
<v Speaker 2>and by having that time away from their normal lives,

0:18:45.356 --> 0:18:49.916
<v Speaker 2>it can change relationships with spouses, it can change relationships

0:18:49.956 --> 0:18:53.436
<v Speaker 2>with jobs. And I've also had jurors decide they want

0:18:53.516 --> 0:18:56.236
<v Speaker 2>to go to law school they've been so inspired by

0:18:56.276 --> 0:19:01.116
<v Speaker 2>the process. So yes, many of the relationships can endure

0:19:01.436 --> 0:19:05.476
<v Speaker 2>among the jurors. They may have a celebratory reunion after

0:19:06.516 --> 0:19:08.836
<v Speaker 2>being through the trial together. Not always.

0:19:09.196 --> 0:19:13.316
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes that's fascinating. So yeah, this trial has you know,

0:19:13.356 --> 0:19:16.156
<v Speaker 1>it of course have a huge impact on sam maankman

0:19:16.236 --> 0:19:19.116
<v Speaker 1>Fried's life, but also to some degree, it'll have a

0:19:19.196 --> 0:19:21.436
<v Speaker 1>huge impact on the lives of the twelve men and

0:19:21.476 --> 0:19:25.876
<v Speaker 1>women who are on the jury. Absolutely Ellan Leggett. Thank

0:19:25.916 --> 0:19:26.916
<v Speaker 1>you so much for your time.

0:19:27.196 --> 0:19:28.116
<v Speaker 2>You're very welcome.

0:19:31.516 --> 0:19:33.716
<v Speaker 3>We'll be back in your feed soon with more expert

0:19:33.756 --> 0:19:37.676
<v Speaker 3>analysis and news from Sam bankman Fried's trial. Thanks for listening.

0:19:39.916 --> 0:19:42.876
<v Speaker 3>This episode of Judging Sam was hosted by Lydia jan Kott.

0:19:44.156 --> 0:19:47.516
<v Speaker 3>Lydia Jancott is our court reporter. Katherine Girardeau and Nisha

0:19:47.596 --> 0:19:51.476
<v Speaker 3>Venken produced this show. Sophie Crane is our editor. Our

0:19:51.596 --> 0:19:54.916
<v Speaker 3>music was composed by Matthias Bossi and John Evans of

0:19:54.996 --> 0:19:59.396
<v Speaker 3>stell Wagon Symphonette. Judging Sam is a production of Pushkin Industries.

0:19:59.836 --> 0:20:02.316
<v Speaker 3>Got a question or comment for me, There's a website

0:20:02.316 --> 0:20:09.036
<v Speaker 3>for that atr podcast dot com. That's atr podcast dot com.

0:20:09.636 --> 0:20:12.716
<v Speaker 3>To find more Pushkin podcasts, listen on the iHeartRadio app,

0:20:12.876 --> 0:20:17.076
<v Speaker 3>Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your podcasts. If

0:20:17.076 --> 0:20:20.356
<v Speaker 3>you'd like to access bonus episodes and listen ad free,

0:20:20.756 --> 0:20:23.156
<v Speaker 3>don't forget to sign up for a Pushkin Plus subscription

0:20:23.516 --> 0:20:26.996
<v Speaker 3>at pushkin dot fm, slash Plus, or on our Apple

0:20:27.036 --> 0:20:34.276
<v Speaker 3>show page.