Here’s a breakdown of the provided text, focusing on the legal and factual aspects of the case:
The Core Issue: The Prosecution of Alexey Pertsev (referred to as “Storm”)
The text discusses the ongoing criminal trial of Alexey Pertsev, who is accused of facilitating money laundering through the cryptocurrency mixer Tornado Cash. The prosecution’s case is facing significant challenges due to several factors.Key Challenges to the Prosecution’s Case:
- Shifting US Government Policy:
Internal Memo: A crucial growth is an internal memo from the new Deputy Attorney General, Todd Blanche, issued in April 2025. This memo reportedly directs the Department of Justice to refrain from criminal prosecution for unlicensed money transfers involving digital assets, unless there is clear fraud involved.
Impact on Allegations: This policy shift has led prosecutors to withdraw some of their charges against Pertsev, specifically the allegation that he failed to register Tornado Cash as a “Money Transmitting Business.”
Remaining Allegations: The prosecution is now focusing on other aspects of the law, such as the intentional use of the platform for transferring illegal funds.
- Legal Predicament and Doubts about Indictment Resilience:
Contradiction: The prosecution’s argument is in a tough position because they are accusing Pertsev of violating rules that the government itself is now indicating should not be the basis for criminal prosecution.
Dilemma: This creates a “classic dilemma” where Pertsev is accused of breaking rules,but those rules may no longer be legally enforceable for prosecution due to the Blanche memo.
Precedent Concerns: the case is being closely watched internationally by the crypto community and civil rights activists as it could set a precedent for whether and how open-source development can be criminalized, and what rights individuals have in an increasingly regulated digital space.
- Failures in Witness Testimony:
First witness’s Testimony: The first witness for the prosecution was a victim of crypto fraud. However, her testimony was based on a report from a questionable blockchain analysis company.
FBI Doubts: An FBI memo revealed that even investigative authorities questioned the credibility of this company.
Lack of Traceability: Crucially, the analysis report that the witness relied on could not definitively trace funds to Tornado Cash.
IRS Official’s Interpretation: an official from the US tax authority (IRS) reportedly conceded that the analysis did not prove that stolen funds actually landed in the Ethereum mixer (Tornado Cash). This is a significant blow to the prosecution’s attempt to link stolen funds to the platform.
- Prosecution’s Apparent Persistence:
The text suggests that the prosecution is trying to “keep a process that has already died” due to the political shift in Washington and the weaknesses in their evidence.Alexey Pertsev’s Decision Not to Testify:
Waiver of Statement: Pertsev has decided not to testify in his own defense. Defense Conclusion: This decision effectively ended the defense’s presentation after three days of trial.
Strategic Move: Given the contradictions in the prosecution’s witnesses and the changing legal landscape,this is likely considered the “best procedure” for the defense.
Potential Complications for Pertsev (Despite Not Testifying):
chat Protocols: While Pertsev is not testifying, chat protocols exist that show his concern about the use of criminal actors.
Discussion of Perpetrator Addresses: In 2022, he discussed the Ronin hack with Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Semenov, including the addresses of the perpetrators.
Suggestion for Public Stance: He also suggested that the Tornado Cash development team should publicly condemn hackers and take a clear stance.
Alerted to Investor: After another hack, Pertsev was alerted in a message to an investor.
* Jury’s Interpretation: The key question is whether the jury will interpret these communications as an admission of guilt or recognize the evolving legal situation.
In Summary:
The prosecution of Alexey Pertsev is in serious trouble. A shift in US government policy regarding the prosecution of unlicensed money transfers, coupled with significant weaknesses in witness testimony and the inability to definitively link illicit funds to Tornado Cash, has severely undermined their case.Pertsev’s decision not to testify is a strategic move to avoid further damaging his defense, but the jury’s interpretation of his past communications remains a potential hurdle. The case is seen as a critical test for the regulation of open-source software and individual rights in the digital age.
