- Roman Storm found guilty of unlicensed operation; money laundering verdict undecided.
- Court considers a retrial for unresolved counts.
- Tornado Cash protocol remains under sanctions by OFAC.
The jury in the Roman Storm trial reached a guilty verdict for conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business while unable to decide on money laundering charges.
The case sets a precedent for legal liability in open-source protocol development, impacting the crypto privacy sector.
Roman Storm and the Tornado Cash Trial
The jury in the Roman Storm case found him guilty of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business, while unable to decide on more severe money laundering charges. Prosecutors may pursue a retrial for the undecided counts. “There is a lot of fighting left in this case before sentencing, and I think Mr. Storm will stay for it,” stated U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla. Protos.
Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash, was charged with operating an unlicensed business. The court alleged he could have adjusted the system to prevent laundering, but the defense stated basic anti-laundering measures were already in place. For more insights on the litigation and its impact on the justice system, see:
The trial outcome raises questions about its impact on DeFi privacy protocols and developer liabilities. Communities remain watchful of any imminent changes affecting the industry regulations and individual developer responsibilities.
Tornado Cash was already under OFAC sanctions since 2022. No major shifts in on-chain flows or market responses have been observed following the verdict, leaving the protocol’s operation relatively stable currently. Significant courtroom drama has unfolded, as highlighted by
Financial implications remain speculative, pending sentencing on the guilty charge. Developers in DeFi may shift approaches, balancing innovation against regulatory compliance to circumvent potential legal challenges like Storm’s.
Potential changes to regulations or enforcement strategies surrounding open-source projects could result. Historical cases like United States v. Griffith indicate increasing scrutiny on managing protocol operations, affecting developers’ roles significantly in privacy-focused projects.
| Disclaimer: The content on The CCPress is provided for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry inherent risks. Please consult a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. |
