DATA Assessment of SBF’s Congressional Testimony

Last week we provided a Deception And Truth Analysis assessment of Sam Bankman Fried’s New York Times interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin. We concluded that each portion of the transcript that featured his communication was deceptive, though not strongly so, with an aggregate DATA Score of -6.13%. We also promised that we would assess his Congressional testimony given on 13 December 2022 after being arrested in the Bahamas the day prior. What follows is our DATA Assessment of SBF’s Congressional testimony.

In total SBF’s testimony is 7,165 words, or roughly 25 pages in length. In our DATA Assessment we break this testimony up into 5 scorable fragments. Overall, the document scores as truthful at 14.89%,[i]but 60% of its 5 fragments score as deceptive. Our DATA Assessment may come as a surprise. But deception scientists have found that most people, most of the time, do tell the truth. Said another way, most people, even those who are suspected of committing fraud do most often tell the truth. That said, there are important sections in SBF’s Congressional testimony in which our DATA Assessment finds that he deviates from the truth.

Below is a screenshot of our premium product, DATAREDline, which shows at-a-glance the running narrative of deceptiveness and truthfulness of SBF’s Congressional testimony. As you can see the following fragments are assessed as deceptive:

• Fragment 1 – DATA Score = ~-15%…this puts this fragment in the bottom 11.40% of all documents scored by DATA.
• Fragment 2 – DATA Score = ~-25%…this puts this fragment in the bottom 1.28% of all documents scored by DATA.
• Fragment 4 – DATA Score = ~-25%…this puts this fragment in the bottom 1.28% of all documents scored by DATA.

So, what is SBF talking about in his deceptive fragments?

SBF discusses the following key themes in Fragment #1:

• His regret at the collapse and bankruptcy of FTX.
• FTX’s staff’s inability to access key data.
• His willingness to work with authorities investigating FTX’s collapse and the bankruptcy.

In addition to this detail from DATAREDline, as a deception scientist myself I can also identify that SBF is being uncooperative and certainly displaying his distaste with having to testify before the US Congress in this fragment, as well as Fragment #2, below.

SBF discusses the following key themes in Fragment #2:

• Additional claims of the inability to access information and his reliance on memory for recall.
• His recall of Alameda Research and its investment strategy and positions, including its use of leverage.
• His narrative around the collapse of Alameda Research and of FTX.

SBF discusses the following key themes in Fragment #4:

• Apparent Letters of Intent to bail out FTX that are worth billions. If only FTX could be allowed to operate again as an exchange.
• The problems are isolated to FTX International and that FTX US is solvent.
• That FTX customers were protected from capital loss until Mr. Ray took over the exchange’s Chapter 11 proceedings.
• That FTX customers’ assets were protected.

Important in any DATA Assessment of a document is a consideration of its truthful fragments, as well. In the case of SBF’s US Congressional testimony here is the breakdown of the truthful fragments:

• Fragment #3 – DATA Score = ~85%…this puts this fragment in the top 99.98% of all documents scored by DATA.
• Fragment #5 – DATA Score = ~60%…this puts this fragment in the top 99.89% of all documents scored by DATA.

Because the overall DATA Assessment finds SBF’s Congressional testimony as truthful, it must be the case that SBF is being very truthful in the above two fragments in order to counterbalance his deceptiveness in the rest of the testimony. So, what is SBF discussing in these truthful fragments?

SBF discusses the following key themes in Fragment #3:

• SBF confesses to his lack of engagement in the company for much of 2022.
• His regrets about what he did and how he would do it differently now.
• His regret about wanting to communicate better to stakeholders when things began to fall apart.
• His regret at signing Chapter 11 paperwork.
• His recall of events surrounding the Chapter 11 filing. [Note: the high precision of details including the exact time when he signed certain documents. This contradicts his testimony that he lacked access to important details, such that his Congressional testimony might be negatively affected.]

To summarize the above fragment, SBF has regrets that the entire collapse of FTX happened.

SBF discusses the following key themes in Fragment #5:

• An enumeration of numerous statements that SBF claims are inaccurate.
• His belief that the Chapter 11 executors have overstepped their authority.
• That other Chapter 11 executors other than Ray are doing a good job.

Our Deception And Truth Analysis Assessment of Sam Bankman Fried’s Congressional testimony finds that he is being strongly truthful in expressing his regret that FTX collapsed and his handling of the collapse. It also finds that he is being strongly truthful in expressing his beliefs about the handling of the Chapter 11 proceedings. While he is being strongly truthful about these things, he is also being strongly deceptive about his access to key data about the collapse; his recall of Alameda Research’s investment strategies and how it collapsed; the presence of important safeguards to protect FTX investors; and the presence of financial backers of FTX if it were allowed to continue on as an exchange.

[i] Recall that DATA Scores range between -100% and +100%, with deceptive scores being negative, and truthful scores being positive. DATA Scores are roughly normally distributed, but with a mean DATA Score of 4.9%. In other words, extreme scores are difficult to attain.