Former OpenAI Insider Mira Murati Calls Altman a Liar Under Oath as Trial Enters Week Three
The Musk v. OpenAI trial has moved well past opening arguments — now former allies are calling Sam Altman a serial liar on the stand. Altman's own testimony revealed he nearly ditched OpenAI's mission for a Microsoft paycheck after his 2023 ouster. This trial is becoming less about corporate structure and more about whether the man running the most powerful AI company in the world can be trusted.
New Week, New Bombshells The Musk v. OpenAI trial entered its third week in federal court in Oakland, California — and the story has shifted decisively. This is no longer just a contract dispute. It's a character trial. The question on the table: Is Sam Altman a liar? The people answering that question aren't Elon Musk's paid lawyers. They're former OpenAI insiders who worked alongside Altman for years. Murati Goes on Record Mira Murati, OpenAI's former Chief Technical Officer and once one of Altman's closest colleagues, testified via video that Altman had a pattern of "saying one thing to one person and completely the opposite to another person." She called it "creating chaos." According to The Guardian, she described it as a "consistent pattern" — not a one-time mistake, not a miscommunication. A pattern. Murati left OpenAI in 2024. She had nothing obvious to gain by testifying against her former boss in a federal courtroom. The court also reviewed text messages Altman sent Murati in 2023 during the five days he was fired and then rehired. The contents were not flattering. Altman's Own Words Undercut His Story Altman took the stand Tuesday and testified for roughly four hours. His lawyers kept it calm — a deliberate contrast to Musk's three days of combative, temper-flaring testimony. But Altman's own words did real damage. He admitted that after OpenAI's board ousted him in November 2023, he seriously considered taking a Microsoft offer to run an AI research division there — where he could, in his words, "get rich." "I was extremely angry," Altman testified. "I felt extremely misled. I was just like, enough is enough. I'm going to go work on a pure AGI research effort." Altman's entire legal defense rests on the claim that he, unlike Musk, genuinely believes in OpenAI's nonprofit mission. That he stayed because of principle, not profit. Yet his own testimony — per Ars Technica — shows he was THIS close to walking away from that mission the moment his ego took a hit. Just like Musk did in 2018. "There was something appealing about going to work at Microsoft with Greg Brockman on a pure AI research effort," Altman said from the stand. He came back. But the reason he gave — that he couldn't bear watching OpenAI get destroyed — sounds a lot more like wounded pride than noble mission. The "Left for Dead" Claim Altman also testified that when Musk left OpenAI's board in February 2018, the company was "left for dead," according to CNBC. He said employees worried Musk would seek "vengeance" and that the funding situation looked grim. At the same time, he testified that Musk's exit was actually a "morale boost" for some researchers — because Musk "demotivated" them and didn't understand "how to run a good research lab." Altman offered both claims with equal conviction. Murati's characterization of his pattern — "saying one thing to one person and completely the opposite to another person" — bears directly on that contradiction. The Board Rejected Musk's Buyout One new, concrete fact came out Tuesday: OpenAI board chair Bret Taylor testified that the board unanimously rejected Musk's bid to acquire OpenAI last year, according to CNBC. Unanimous. Every single board member said no. Musk's team has tried to frame his lawsuit as principled whistleblowing. The unanimous rejection suggests OpenAI's current leadership — including the board — sees this as hostile action, not a good-faith effort to restore the nonprofit mission. The Bigger Picture Most outlets are framing this as Altman vs. Musk — a billionaire grudge match. That framing lets both men off the hook. The actual story is simpler: The people who built OpenAI from scratch don't fully trust each other, never did, and the organization controlling some of the most powerful technology ever developed has a leadership culture that insiders describe as chaotic and deceptive. CNBC and Ars Technica have done solid factual reporting on the testimony. The Guardian added critical context on the insider accounts of Altman's character. But the coverage hasn't pressed hard enough on what this means for the AI systems these people control. OpenAI's technology is inside your iPhone, your customer service calls, your kids' homework tools, and soon your healthcare decisions. The man running that company just testified — under oath — that a former close colleague called him a habitual liar. That he nearly abandoned his stated mission for a Microsoft paycheck. That his own departure crisis in 2023 left him feeling so betrayed he was willing to walk away. Musk is NOT a sympathetic plaintiff. His three days of angry testimony didn't help his case. But "Musk is also bad" is not a defense for Altman. Two things are true simultaneously: Musk may be motivated by ego and revenge. AND Sam Altman may be running the world's most consequential A
Read on Unbiased Headlines
