“Affirming to offer cash tornado service as a” privacy service “, the defendants knew it was a refuge for criminals participating in the evasion of sanctions and large -scale money laundering,” the accusation alleged.
At the trial, prosecutors presented evidence that they claimed to demonstrate that Tornado Cash was designed for money laundering from the beginning. His witnesses included a victim of fraud whose stolen funds was said that they went through Tornado’s cash, although this account was Disputed online by prominent members of the cryptographic industry and a convicted scammer who used the service to wash the bad profits obtained. “Washy, Washy,” the scammer Supposedly he wrote To his girlfriend, in a message about Tornado’s cash.
When the government closed its case last week, prosecutors dismissed the issue of privacy as a convenient distraction. “Real money was not in the so -called ‘privacy’ for normal people,” is Benjamin Gianforti, one of the prosecutors, is aforementioned as saying. “Dirty money was hidden for criminals.”
Storm and the other developers even made a Tornado Cash brand t -shirt Print with an image of a washing machineprosecutors noted.
Storm’s lawyers, meanwhile, He tried to discuss That although his client had developed the technology exploited by the bad actors, he had not dedicated himself to any crime or handled dirty money. “You will never hear any evidence that Roman or the [other] The co -founders participated in any hacks ” saying Keri Curtis Axel, partner of the Waymaker law firm and advisor to Storm, in his opening comments.
The storm was helpless to avoid the abuse of tornado cash, the defense As reported, arguedBecause he and the other developers had resigned from the ability to modify or disable the underlying code, in the spirit of decentralization.
The defense called the stand several witnesses that He talked about possible legitimate uses for tornado cash. But Storm did not testify, which would have opened it to the interrogation by the Prosecutor’s Office.
Ultimately, despite finding a guilty storm of the lower violation of the transmission of money, the jury proved to be receptive to the defense reasoning line.
“The jury divided the proverbial baby,” says Mark Bini, partner of the cryptographic practice of the law firm Reed Smith and former federal prosecutor. “While the convincing arguments of the defense probably accredited that there are legitimate privacy uses for mixers and that Storm was not directly involved in any of the crimes in which Tornado’s cash was used, they felt uncomfortable with the steps that Tornado Cash took or did not take to avoid illicit uses.”
The storm now expects the sentence, which generally takes place A few months after a conviction. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice must decide whether to try again the money laundering count in which the jury could not agree.
“The Government could choose to try the storm again in the counted count, but according to the notes returning from the jury, I hope they go to the sentence based on the conviction they assured,” says Bini. “While they are likely to defend a hard phrase, the jury’s verdict seems to get a lot out of the case of the government.”
Update 8/06/25 at 3:32 PM EST: This article has been updated with a statement by Matthew Green, an expert defense witness.
#Cash #developer #Tornado #Roman #Storm #guilty #position #case #federal #cryptography
