Tornado Cash creates encryption anonymity. Now, its creators are facing trial
Legal experts say most of the trial will focus on whether the storm used for cash for tornadoes is intended for illegal means, whether he knows the funds it is used to launder money, and whether he knows that no conduct means violation of the law, as the prosecutor said.
Cohen said the defense will claim that the developer never intended to use the tornado cash for fraud. “Prosecutions will say they should know, but put their heads on the beach,” he said.
The jury will also contradict the structure and how the tornado cash works, which may be related to what rules storms and other developers must follow.
Government prosecutors argue that Tornado Cash operates as efficiently as any other for-profit business, regardless of how the founder waives control of the underlying regulations. In the indictment, they believe the storm is operating a currency transmitter, which requires him to collect identifying information about users that could prevent tornado cash from being abused for money laundering proceeds of cybercrime.
Meanwhile, the defense repeatedly stressed the distance between the storm and the transaction through the tornado cash. Although developers manage the optional user interface, they noted that they have no custody of user funds. Supporters of the storm claim there is no precedent for the government’s interpretation of the currency transfer law.
“If software agreements for private transactions that people make on behalf of people themselves are crimes for this country, then we have abandoned the First and Fourth Amendment principles that make the country great,” said Peter Van Valkenburgh, executive director of Crypto advocate.
The guilty verdict implied by the storm could have a potentially fatal blow to decentralized finance, a cryptocurrency circle’s ambition to develop peer-to-peer financial services without being controlled by rent-seeking intermediaries and top-down control. “If I lose, then die with me.” “The dream of financial freedom, the code I believe in – everything gradually turns into darkness.”
Others believe that the spillover effect of the scope may be greater, which shocks the entire software development industry. “This is a referendum on publishing software rights. It’s much wider than Defi,” Van Valkenburgh said. “It’s a referendum on whether you can perform the functions of software developers and communications intermediaries without having to face unlimited liability for sanctions, money laundering and unlicensed currency transfers.”
If the storm is responsible for the abuse of tornado cash by illegal actors, his guard asked: Why is Linus Torvalds not responsible for criminal acts enabled by Linux operating systems, or for criminal activities carried out by WhatsApp?
If a guilty sentence is convicted, these arguments are likely to escalate into the Court of Appeal. Several storm supporters say they prefer the opportunity in the Second Circuit, where the judge (rather than the peer jury) is tasked with making indifferent and reluctant judgments about the application of the law.
“The government’s theory is incorrect and will eventually be rejected by the court, if not a jury,” Chervinsky said. “The U.S. Supreme Court may be where we end up.”
As the date of his trial approached, the storm cut down on the firm and merciless figures. “I have no regrets about my behavior,” he said in a recent interview with the American Cryptocurrency podcast. “I won’t change anything I do.”
