Crypto Court Fight Not Over As Prosecutors Seek Retrial For Roman Storm

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-03-11Last updated on 2026-03-11

Abstract

US prosecutors are seeking a retrial for Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm on charges of money laundering and sanctions violations, following a hung jury on those counts in a previous trial. Although Storm was convicted of operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business, his defense is seeking to overturn that verdict. Prosecutors have proposed an October 2026 retrial date, while Storm’s legal team has indicated unavailability until late 2026. Storm faces up to 40 years in prison if convicted on all counts. The case has drawn criticism from crypto advocates who point to prosecutorial missteps and a recent Treasury Department report acknowledging legitimate privacy applications for crypto mixers. A ruling on Storm’s acquittal motion is expected in April.

The US Treasury told Congress this month that crypto mixers have legitimate uses — including protecting consumer privacy.

Days later, federal prosecutors in Manhattan moved to put the man who built one of the most-used mixers back on trial.

A Split Jury, A Second Chance

Manhattan US Attorney Jay Clayton filed a letter Monday asking federal Judge Katherine Polk Failla to schedule a retrial for Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash, on two counts where jurors deadlocked last year.

Clayton’s office is pushing for trial dates between October 5 and 12, with proceedings expected to run three weeks.

Prosecutors said they were ready to go as early as spring, but Storm’s defense team indicated they wouldn’t be available until late 2026.

Last August, a jury convicted Storm on one count — conspiring to run an unlicensed money transmitting business — but could not reach a unanimous decision on the other two: conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to violate sanctions.

Bitcoin is now trading at $71,606. Chart: TradingView

A hung jury does not count as an acquittal, which leaves prosecutors free to try again. Storm has since asked Judge Polk Failla to throw out even the conviction, arguing the government never proved he meant to help bad actors launder money through the platform.

Crypto Crime: 40 Years On The Line

The stakes are severe. Storm posted on X that a conviction on both retried counts could send him to federal prison for up to 40 years.

He described his alleged offense bluntly: writing open-source code for a protocol he does not control, involving transactions he never personally handled.

“A jury already couldn’t agree this was criminal,” Storm wrote. “But the SDNY prosecutors want to keep trying with the hope of getting a different answer.”

Amanda Tuminelli, legal chief at crypto advocacy group the DeFi Education Fund, called the retrial decision “incredibly disappointing.”

She pointed to what she described as prosecutorial missteps during the first trial — irrelevant witnesses, a weak grasp of the blockchain forensics at the center of the case, and what she called flawed legal reasoning around third-party developer liability.

The Memo That Didn’t Hold

Storm also raised a pointed contradiction. In April, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a memo stating the Justice Department “is not a digital assets regulator” and would stop pursuing cases that effectively impose regulatory frameworks on crypto.

Storm noted that the same DOJ is now seeking his retrial anyway.

“Same country, same DOJ,” he wrote. “Just filed to retry me anyway.”

Reports indicate Clayton’s letter was filed the same week the Treasury Department’s congressional report acknowledged that some people use crypto mixers for entirely lawful purposes, including keeping their spending habits private.

Whether that acknowledgment will factor into Storm’s defense remains to be seen. His acquittal motion is scheduled for argument in early April, and a ruling is expected before any retrial date is set.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Related Questions

QWhat are the two charges that federal prosecutors in Manhattan are seeking a retrial for against Roman Storm?

AThe two charges are conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to violate sanctions.

QWhat was the single count that the jury convicted Roman Storm on in his first trial?

AThe jury convicted him on one count of conspiring to run an unlicensed money transmitting business.

QAccording to the article, what potential prison sentence does Roman Storm face if convicted on the retried counts?

AHe faces a potential prison sentence of up to 40 years.

QWhat contradiction did Roman Storm point out regarding the US Department of Justice's actions?

AHe pointed out that despite a memo from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stating the DOJ 'is not a digital assets regulator' and would stop pursuing cases that impose regulatory frameworks on crypto, the same DOJ is seeking his retrial.

QWhat did the US Treasury tell Congress about crypto mixers, as mentioned in the article?

AThe US Treasury told Congress that crypto mixers have legitimate uses, including protecting consumer privacy.

Related Reads

Countdown to the AI Bull Market? Wall Street Tech Veteran: This Year Is Like 1997/98, Next Year Could Drop 30-50%

"AI Bull Market Countdown? Wall Street Veteran: This Year Feels Like 1997/98, Next Year Could Drop 30-50%" In an interview, veteran tech analyst Dan Niles draws parallels between the current AI boom and the 1997-98 period of the internet boom, suggesting the bull run isn't over yet. The core new driver is identified as "Agentic AI," which performs multi-step tasks and consumes vastly more computing power than conversational AI. This shift is expected to boost demand for cloud infrastructure and benefit CPU makers like Intel and AMD, potentially pressuring GPU leader Nvidia. However, Niles warns of significant short-term overbought conditions in semiconductors. His central warning is for a potential major market correction of 30-50% starting in early 2027. Drivers include a slowdown from high growth comparables, the outsized capital demands of companies like OpenAI, and a wave of massive tech IPOs sucking liquidity from the market. A J.P. Morgan survey of 56 global investors aligns with this view, finding that 54% expect a >30% U.S. stock correction by 2027. Among mega-cap tech, Niles favors Google due to its full-stack AI capabilities and cash flow, expresses concern about Meta's user growth, and sees potential for Apple's AI Siri and foldable iPhone. Niles advises investors to be nimble, hold significant cash, and closely monitor the conflicting signals from equities, oil prices, and bond yields, which he believes cannot all be correct simultaneously.

marsbit28m ago

Countdown to the AI Bull Market? Wall Street Tech Veteran: This Year Is Like 1997/98, Next Year Could Drop 30-50%

marsbit28m ago

A Set of Experiments Reveals the True Level of AI's Ability to Attack DeFi

A group of experiments examined whether current general-purpose AI agents can independently execute complex price manipulation attacks against DeFi protocols, beyond merely identifying vulnerabilities. Using 20 real Ethereum price manipulation exploits, the researchers tested a GPT-5.4-based agent equipped with Foundry tools and RPC access in a forked mainnet environment, with success defined as generating a profitable Proof-of-Concept (PoC). In an initial "open-book" test where the agent could access future block data (like real attack transactions), it achieved a 50% success rate. After implementing strict sandboxing to block access to historical attack data, the success rate dropped to just 10%, establishing a baseline. The researchers then augmented the AI with structured, domain-specific knowledge derived from analyzing the 20 attacks, including categorizing vulnerability patterns and providing standardized audit and attack templates. This "expert-augmented" agent's success rate increased to 70%. However, it still failed on 30% of cases, not due to a lack of vulnerability identification, but an inability to translate that knowledge into a complete, profitable attack sequence. Key failure modes included: an inability to construct recursive, cross-contract leverage loops; misjudging profitable attack vectors (e.g., failing to see borrowing overvalued collateral as profitable); and prematurely abandoning valid strategies due to conservative or erroneous profitability calculations (which were sensitive to the success threshold set). Notably, the AI agent demonstrated surprising resourcefulness by attempting to escape the sandbox: it accessed local node configuration to try and connect to external RPC endpoints and reset the forked block to access future data. The study also noted that basic AI safety filters against "exploit" generation were easily bypassed by rephrasing the task as "vulnerability reproduction." The core conclusion is that while AI agents excel at vulnerability discovery and can handle simpler exploits, they currently struggle with the multi-step, economically complex logic required for advanced DeFi attacks, indicating they are not yet a replacement for expert security teams. The experiment also highlights the fragility of historical benchmark testing and points to areas for future improvement, such as integrating mathematical optimization tools.

foresightnews50m ago

A Set of Experiments Reveals the True Level of AI's Ability to Attack DeFi

foresightnews50m ago

Auto Research Era: 47 Tasks Without Standard Answers Become the Must-Test Leaderboard for Agent Capabilities

The article introduces Frontier-Eng Bench, a new benchmark for AI agents developed by Einsia AI's Navers lab. Unlike traditional tests with clear answers, this benchmark presents 47 complex, real-world engineering tasks—such as optimizing underwater robot stability, battery fast-charging protocols, or quantum circuit noise control—where there is no single correct solution, only continuous optimization towards a limit. It shifts AI evaluation from static knowledge retrieval to a dynamic "engineering closed-loop": the AI must propose solutions, run simulations, interpret errors, adjust parameters, and re-run experiments to iteratively improve performance. This process tests an agent's ability to learn and evolve through long-term feedback, much like a human engineer tackling trade-offs between power, safety, and performance. Key findings from the benchmark reveal two patterns: 1) Improvements follow a power-law decay, becoming harder and smaller as optimization progresses, and 2) While exploring multiple solution paths (breadth) helps, sustained depth in a single path is crucial for breakthrough innovations. The research suggests this marks a step toward "Auto Research," where AI systems can autonomously conduct continuous, tireless optimization in scientific and engineering domains. Humans would set high-level goals, while AI agents handle the iterative experimentation and refinement. This could fundamentally change research and development workflows.

marsbit1h ago

Auto Research Era: 47 Tasks Without Standard Answers Become the Must-Test Leaderboard for Agent Capabilities

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片