The people nearest and dearest to Sam Bankman-Fried (and those who aren't anymore) could be called to testify in his criminal trial, Crystal writes.

Driving the news: A list of possible witnesses was read to potential jurors yesterday on Day 1 of U.S. v. SBF in New York.

• The founder of collapsed crypto exchange FTX is facing seven fraud and conspiracy charges that could have him sentenced to prison for a century.

Zoom in: The list includes former Alameda Research CEO Sam Trabucco, SkyBridge Capital's Anthony Scaramucci, SBF's mother Barbara Fried, his father Joseph Bankman and his brother Gabriel.

• Trabucco was the biggest surprise — in part, because he's been MIA since narrowly escaping the collapse of FTX by leaving in August 2022. The man's so MIA that reports of his potential whereabouts have involved the U.S. Coast Guard.
• Others on that list included witnesses already expected to take the stand: Caroline Ellison, who ran Alameda alongside Trabucco before he left and former FTX engineering director Nishad Singh.

Yes, but: That list is the kitchen sink, according to Daniel Silva, former federal prosecutor and now lawyer at Buchalter's San Diego office.

• The constitution requires that prosecutors give notice of possible witnesses to the defendant so they can adequately prepare a defense.
• "What some prosecutors do is next-level prosecution chess," Silva says. "They'll put certain challenging or otherwise very important witnesses on there to get the defense to prepare for that person, knowing full well they won't call them."

What we're watching: Whether SBF will testify.

One of Judge Lewis Kaplan's early remarks yesterday directed at SBF was that he — and not his lawyers — should be the one to decide whether to testify.

• And that he could signal to the judge if he wanted to do so, Crystal writes.

Context: Given the possibility that SBF presents an "advice of counsel" defense, the judge is trying to ensure that "if SBF wanted to testify, but his counsel didn't, he could signal discreetly without influencing the jury," Silva, the former prosecutor, tells Axios.

• Be smart: The advice-of-counsel strategy blames lawyers for the crime. The defense argues that a defendant acted in good faith, led to believe — by legal counsel — that they were within the law.

The big picture: A defendant's testimony can be a double-edged sword.

• And even more so in SBF's case, according to Yesha Yadav, professor of law at Vanderbilt University.

What they're saying: "It's always risky. You have to be super disciplined and contained or you potentially undermine your own defense," Yadav says.

• "His whole defense is he did nothing wrong and his lieutenants carried this out. If you're telling that story to the jury, you may want to be a human being in front of them."

💭 Crystal's thought bubble: It's asking a lot for a once-billionaire gamer, whose preferred source of warmth is a computer, to sell "human" to a jury of 12 New Yorkers.

Yesterday and the early part of today are dedicated to jury selection (and those who badly wanted out of it), Crystal writes.

"The object is to select a jury of individuals who, no matter what they may know or not know about these parties, or about this case, are willing and able to decide this case in a manner that's fair and impartial to both sides, based solely on the evidence that the jury will see and hear at this trial."

Quick take: It was hard to tell how famous SBF is among those gathered in the courthouse.

• The judge asked every potential juror if they had personal knowledge of the case or the relevant people and companies, whether they had watched a CBS Special or Sunday's "60 Minutes."

💭 Crystal's thought bubble: One of my closest friends happened to be in the jury selection room on the first floor, and she says people were talking about SBF's very short haircut.

• So they DO know!

Separately, some questions probed whether jurors were confident that, in the event the government proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, they could vote to convict:

• in spite of their sympathy
• if they themselves or their loved ones had been convicted of a crime
• or had any association with the SEC or CFTC staff

Between the lines: It's not so much about weeding people out, but more about getting to know them.

Of note: Here are some jurors who were excused on Day 1.

• Juror No. 30, worked at private equity firm Insight Partners, which invested in FTX and Alameda. (Prosecutors wanted to excuse; SBF's lawyers opposed; was excused for cause)
• Juror No. 47, appeared before federal court with their spouse on racketeering charges and was exonerated. (Prosecutors wanted to excuse, SBF's lawyers opposed)
• Juror No. 83, had the best line of the day. "First of all, I don't understand the cryptocurrency, how it works." (Everyone speculated he was just trying to get out of jury duty)

What we're watching: The final 12 jurors and six alternates. Stay tuned.

👎 The SEC lost a motion to early appeal the Ripple ruling (CoinDesk) and pushed forward in its case against Coinbase. (Bloomberg)

💁‍♂️ Crypto-friendly Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) is speaker pro tem. (Wall Street Journal)

💸 Anthropic, an FTX investment, is in talks to raise $2 billion from Google and others just days after securing $1.25 billion from Amazon. (The Information)

🧑🏻‍🦱 SBF's trial is complicating life for the crypto lobby in Congress. (Politico)

There's no shortage of SBF headlines this week, but the sheer variety of subject matter is getting weird, Axios' Pete Gannon writes.

Driving the news: As anyone reading this newsletter knows, Bankman-Fried's trial kicked off yesterday. There's lots to read there about jury selection, legal defense strategies and witness lists.

• Also yesterday, Michael Lewis' book, "Going Infinite: The Rise and Fall of a New Tycoon," hit shelves. From that, we're getting headlines about an argument SBF was having about his cargo shorts from a bathroom as Bahamian authorities waited outside to arrest him.

💭 Pete's thought bubble: This isn't a critique of Lewis' book — I haven't even had time to finish it. (Though I know the crypto world has strong opinions)

• Instead, it's a reminder of what is likely in store over the next six weeks.

The bottom line: Sam Bankman-Fried is an interesting character. Just ask Tom Brady or any number of people in Congress. And there will be plenty of color coming out about the man from the trial, too, with plenty of public interest.

• But there's also a criminal trial underway, with a lot at stake in terms of how we adjudicate personal accountability for corporate misdeeds. As Brady wrote, the trial will decide whether or not one of the greatest financial boondoggles in history was, in fact, a fraud.