The SEC made several HUGE mistakes in this case:
1) Didn’t limit the allegations to specific transfers of #XRP during specific years (ie 2013-2017;
2) That mistake forced them to allege the token itself is a security per se, which, in essence, attacked individual #XRPHolders;
1) Didn’t limit the allegations to specific transfers of #XRP during specific years (ie 2013-2017;
2) That mistake forced them to allege the token itself is a security per se, which, in essence, attacked individual #XRPHolders;
https://twitter.com/cryptodukeji/status/1515175197539594244
3) Suing @bgarlinghouse & @chrislarsensf individually, even though fraud or misrepresentation ISN’T alleged, forcing the SEC to meet a much higher burden of proof to establish the executives were reckless in not knowing #XRP was a security (despite the SEC itself not knowing);
4) Worried about @Ripple’s fair notice defense, the SEC tried to be cute and called Hinman’s speech his personal opinion only, which waived any invocation of the deliberative process privilege.
Why were these rookie and glaring prosecutorial mistakes made by such smart lawyers?
Why were these rookie and glaring prosecutorial mistakes made by such smart lawyers?
Go to Crypto-Law.us and select video library and watch and read our indisputable fact timeline. To be candid, Joseph Grundfest alluded to the reasons why before any of us.
These gross mistakes were made b/c the lawsuit itself served as both the means and the end.
These gross mistakes were made b/c the lawsuit itself served as both the means and the end.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
