Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm's trial postponed to april amid expert witness dispute
Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm's trial postponed to april amid expert witness dispute
Roman Storm, a developer for the cryptocurrency mixing service Tornado Cash, will see his criminal trial postponed to April 2024, four months later than originally scheduled. A New York judge granted the delay on Friday, citing ongoing disputes over expert witness disclosures between Storm’s defense team and the prosecution.
The issue stems from an October order by Judge Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York, which required both parties to exchange information regarding the expert witnesses they might call. Storm’s attorney, Brian Klein of Waymaker LLP, argued against this disclosure requirement, contending that revealing expert witnesses would compromise Storm’s defense strategy. Klein’s court filing on October 14 asserted that the judge’s order could violate federal rules governing criminal cases, specifically noting that the defense has not requested similar information from the prosecution and thus should not be compelled to disclose its own expert list.
Defense Challenges Judge’s Disclosure Order in Higher Court
Storm’s legal team has taken further action by filing a mandamus petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, seeking a higher court order to overturn Judge Failla’s ruling. A hearing on the mandamus petition is scheduled for November 12, just five months before Storm’s trial is set to commence on April 14. The trial is anticipated to last approximately two weeks.
Facing three charges related to his work with Tornado Cash, including conspiracy to facilitate money laundering, conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitter, and violating U.S. sanctions, Storm could face up to 45 years in prison if convicted on all counts. His case highlights the legal complexities surrounding cryptocurrency mixing services, which are designed to obscure transactional origins and are increasingly scrutinized by regulators for potential involvement in illicit activities.
In recent days, legal cases are gaining momentum, especially around marketmakers
