4 ms·
I believe the above post was mostly in jest but just to clarify - to qualify for any sort of lighter sentencing you'd need to demonstrate a far more impactful i
by munk-a 4y ago
I believe the above post was mostly in jest but just to clarify - to qualify for any sort of lighter sentencing you'd need to demonstrate a far more impactful intellectual disability.
Idiots are everywhere in society - there are idiot billionaires, idiot crypto bros and idiots that you pass on the street everyday. Normal idiocy is not a defense - otherwise it probably would've been significantly easier for Elon Musk to back out of the acquisition of Twitter.
- cmeacham98 4y agoMy (albeit limited) understanding is that if SBF's lawyers can convince the jury that he was simply very incompetent that would be better (still a crime, but a less severe one) than if he intentionally defrauded customers. Similar to the difference between murder and manslaughter. I don't think he's actually trying to bolster his defense though, I think he's largely an idiot and used to getting away with almost anything with few/no consequences.
- brasic 4y agoYeah, playing the fool is much more likely to be an attempt to influence the jury’s view of mens rea. https://www.wsj.com/articles/prosecution-of-sam-bankman-fried-could-rise-or-fall-on-intent-11671065127 https://www.wsj.com/articles/prosecution-of-sam-bankman-frie...
- Eduard 4y agoAdditionally, a narcist can be too proud for exploiting a "I did a stupid mistake" defense.