A group of doctors has argued that Sam Bankman-Fried’s neurodivergence may have affected how the court and jury interpreted his behavior during his criminal trial. In an amicus brief submitted to the Second Circuit Appeals Court, eight doctors specializing in neurodivergence claim that Bankman-Fried’s diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) significantly impacted his responses during the proceedings.
According to the brief, these conditions contributed to “longwinded answers” that frustrated the court, and several rulings during the trial exacerbated the situation. One particular decision by the Manhattan district court allowed prosecutors to cross-examine Bankman-Fried without the jury present, a move the doctors claim was harmful due to his neurodivergent traits.
How Autism Shaped His Courtroom Behavior
The doctors noted that individuals with ASD often interpret language literally and may feel compelled to clarify or rephrase questions, which could result in lengthier responses. They argued that the judge’s consistent reprimands of Bankman-Fried for his extended answers and attempts to explain himself could be traced to this neurodivergent tendency. As a result, they believe Bankman-Fried altered his responses when testifying before the jury, giving unusually short answers, often limited to a simple “Yup.”
These clipped responses, according to the doctors, might have given jurors the wrong impression of his demeanor. The brief suggested that such brevity could be misinterpreted as arrogance or indifference, which may have hurt his case.
Impact of Limited Access to Documents and Medication
In addition to these communication challenges, the doctors pointed out that Bankman-Fried’s ability to defend himself was further hampered by his lack of access to crucial FTX documents and appropriate ADHD medication during the trial. They argued that for individuals with ASD, having concrete documentation helps anchor their responses. Without access to key records, Bankman-Fried may have appeared uncertain or evasive, which could have negatively influenced perceptions of his testimony.
Also Read: FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried Handed 25-Year Prison Term
Furthermore, Bankman-Fried was reportedly denied his full dosage of ADHD medication during the early stages of the trial. His doctors noted that without extended-release medication, he struggled to focus during critical parts of the trial, particularly when the government presented evidence.
These factors, the doctors claimed, created a “serious handicap” for Bankman-Fried, making it difficult for him to fully engage and respond appropriately during the trial. They believe these issues warrant consideration in his appeal and highlight the unique challenges faced by neurodivergent individuals in legal proceedings.
Possible Consequences
Bankman-Fried’s legal team hopes this amicus brief will shed light on how his neurodivergent conditions affected his trial. In March, he was sentenced to 25 years in prison for defrauding FTX customers out of $11 billion. During sentencing, Judge Lewis Kaplan criticized Bankman-Fried for being “evasive” and “hair-splitting,” which the doctors argue may be symptoms of his neurodivergence, not deliberate misconduct.
