After 18 tense days in a Manhattan federal courtroom, the high-profile U.S. v. Peraire-Bueno trial has ended in a mistrial. Judge Jessica G.L. Clarke declared the outcome late Friday, citing a deadlocked jury unable to reach a unanimous verdict on charges of wire fraud and money laundering. Challenges seen in the case are to some extent similar to what happened between the Department of Justice and Tornado Cash. $25 Million Trial Tests Whether Code Can Be a Crime The case centered on two MIT-educated brothers, Benjamin and Noah Peraire-Bueno, accused of orchestrating an exploit on Ethereum’s Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) system. Ethereum MEV is a core mechanism that determines how transactions are ordered in blocks. Prosecutors alleged the pair executed so-called “sandwich attacks”, manipulating transaction sequencing to siphon roughly $25 million from other traders. Matthew Russell Lee of the Inner-City Press described the case as one of the most technically complex crypto cases to date, testing the boundaries between algorithmic opportunism and criminal intent. Reportedly, defense attorneys argued that the brothers leveraged public blockchain code, conduct they claimed was “within the rules of the system.” Prosecutors, however, painted the scheme as a calculated digital heist disguised as clever coding. The mistrial was declared after three days of jury deliberations. Throughout the trial, jurors struggled to understand how to interpret mens rea, or criminal intent, in the context of decentralized finance (DeFi). Code vs. Intent — The Legal Grey Area Exposed by the Mistrial According to courtroom transcripts shared by Lee, defense lawyer Looby argued that “the government didn’t want this description of intent in there,” emphasizing that the accused believed they were acting within the technical framework of Ethereum rather than committing a traditional fraud. The prosecution countered that the defendants acted with “wrongful purpose,” exploiting a system designed for transparency to deceive and enrich themselves. Judge Clarke noted that under existing statutes, “there is no requirement that the defendants knew their actions were illegal.” The mistrial now leaves both regulators and developers with a difficult precedent, or lack thereof. The Peraire-Bueno case could have set a landmark judgment on whether code-based exploits in decentralized networks can be prosecuted under conventional fraud laws. Instead, it ends with ambiguity. The Department of Justice has not yet announced whether it will seek a retrial. DeFi advocates could call the outcome a victory for open systems and innovation. To some extent, this case mirrors the challenges seen with the Tornado Cash case. As the case centered on decentralization, it sparked debate on regulating blockchain tied to criminal misuse. As it initially happened, a US federal appeals court struck down sanctions imposed by the Treasury Department on Tornado Cash. After 18 tense days in a Manhattan federal courtroom, the high-profile U.S. v. Peraire-Bueno trial has ended in a mistrial. Judge Jessica G.L. Clarke declared the outcome late Friday, citing a deadlocked jury unable to reach a unanimous verdict on charges of wire fraud and money laundering. Challenges seen in the case are to some extent similar to what happened between the Department of Justice and Tornado Cash. $25 Million Trial Tests Whether Code Can Be a Crime The case centered on two MIT-educated brothers, Benjamin and Noah Peraire-Bueno, accused of orchestrating an exploit on Ethereum’s Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) system. Ethereum MEV is a core mechanism that determines how transactions are ordered in blocks. Prosecutors alleged the pair executed so-called “sandwich attacks”, manipulating transaction sequencing to siphon roughly $25 million from other traders. Matthew Russell Lee of the Inner-City Press described the case as one of the most technically complex crypto cases to date, testing the boundaries between algorithmic opportunism and criminal intent. Reportedly, defense attorneys argued that the brothers leveraged public blockchain code, conduct they claimed was “within the rules of the system.” Prosecutors, however, painted the scheme as a calculated digital heist disguised as clever coding. The mistrial was declared after three days of jury deliberations. Throughout the trial, jurors struggled to understand how to interpret mens rea, or criminal intent, in the context of decentralized finance (DeFi). Code vs. Intent — The Legal Grey Area Exposed by the Mistrial According to courtroom transcripts shared by Lee, defense lawyer Looby argued that “the government didn’t want this description of intent in there,” emphasizing that the accused believed they were acting within the technical framework of Ethereum rather than committing a traditional fraud. The prosecution countered that the defendants acted with “wrongful purpose,” exploiting a system designed for transparency to deceive and enrich themselves. Judge Clarke noted that under existing statutes, “there is no requirement that the defendants knew their actions were illegal.” The mistrial now leaves both regulators and developers with a difficult precedent, or lack thereof. The Peraire-Bueno case could have set a landmark judgment on whether code-based exploits in decentralized networks can be prosecuted under conventional fraud laws. Instead, it ends with ambiguity. The Department of Justice has not yet announced whether it will seek a retrial. DeFi advocates could call the outcome a victory for open systems and innovation. To some extent, this case mirrors the challenges seen with the Tornado Cash case. As the case centered on decentralization, it sparked debate on regulating blockchain tied to criminal misuse. As it initially happened, a US federal appeals court struck down sanctions imposed by the Treasury Department on Tornado Cash.
Mistrial in $25 Million Ethereum ‘Sandwich Bot’ Case Puts Code and Value on Trial
After 18 tense days in a Manhattan federal courtroom, the high-profile U.S. v. Peraire-Bueno trial has ended in a mistrial.
Judge Jessica G.L. Clarke declared the outcome late Friday, citing a deadlocked jury unable to reach a unanimous verdict on charges of wire fraud and money laundering. Challenges seen in the case are to some extent similar to what happened between the Department of Justice and Tornado Cash.
$25 Million Trial Tests Whether Code Can Be a Crime
The case centered on two MIT-educated brothers, Benjamin and Noah Peraire-Bueno, accused of orchestrating an exploit on Ethereum’s Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) system.
Ethereum MEV is a core mechanism that determines how transactions are ordered in blocks. Prosecutors alleged the pair executed so-called “sandwich attacks”, manipulating transaction sequencing to siphon roughly $25 million from other traders.
Matthew Russell Lee of the Inner-City Press described the case as one of the most technically complex crypto cases to date, testing the boundaries between algorithmic opportunism and criminal intent.
Reportedly, defense attorneys argued that the brothers leveraged public blockchain code, conduct they claimed was “within the rules of the system.” Prosecutors, however, painted the scheme as a calculated digital heist disguised as clever coding. The mistrial was declared after three days of jury deliberations.
Throughout the trial, jurors struggled to understand how to interpret mens rea, or criminal intent, in the context of decentralized finance (DeFi).
Code vs. Intent — The Legal Grey Area Exposed by the Mistrial
According to courtroom transcripts shared by Lee, defense lawyer Looby argued that “the government didn’t want this description of intent in there,” emphasizing that the accused believed they were acting within the technical framework of Ethereum rather than committing a traditional fraud.
The prosecution countered that the defendants acted with “wrongful purpose,” exploiting a system designed for transparency to deceive and enrich themselves.
Judge Clarke noted that under existing statutes, “there is no requirement that the defendants knew their actions were illegal.”
The mistrial now leaves both regulators and developers with a difficult precedent, or lack thereof. The Peraire-Bueno case could have set a landmark judgment on whether code-based exploits in decentralized networks can be prosecuted under conventional fraud laws.
Instead, it ends with ambiguity. The Department of Justice has not yet announced whether it will seek a retrial. DeFi advocates could call the outcome a victory for open systems and innovation.
To some extent, this case mirrors the challenges seen with the Tornado Cash case. As the case centered on decentralization, it sparked debate on regulating blockchain tied to criminal misuse.
As it initially happened, a US federal appeals court struck down sanctions imposed by the Treasury Department on Tornado Cash.
Piyasa Fırsatı
Hyperbot Fiyatı(BOT)
$0.003953
$0.003953$0.003953
USD
Hyperbot (BOT) Canlı Fiyat Grafiği
Sorumluluk Reddi: Bu sitede yeniden yayınlanan makaleler, halka açık platformlardan alınmıştır ve yalnızca bilgilendirme amaçlıdır. MEXC'nin görüşlerini yansıtmayabilir. Tüm hakları telif sahiplerine aittir. Herhangi bir içeriğin üçüncü taraf haklarını ihlal ettiğini düşünüyorsanız, kaldırılması için lütfen service@support.mexc.com ile iletişime geçin. MEXC, içeriğin doğruluğu, eksiksizliği veya güncelliği konusunda hiçbir garanti vermez ve sağlanan bilgilere dayalı olarak alınan herhangi bir eylemden sorumlu değildir. İçerik, finansal, yasal veya diğer profesyonel tavsiye niteliğinde değildir ve MEXC tarafından bir tavsiye veya onay olarak değerlendirilmemelidir.
Ayrıca Şunları da Beğenebilirsiniz
The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For
The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush. Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs. Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Paylaş
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
SOLANA NETWORK Withstands 6 Tbps DDoS Without Downtime
The post SOLANA NETWORK Withstands 6 Tbps DDoS Without Downtime appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. In a pivotal week for crypto infrastructure, the Solana network
Paylaş
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/16 20:44
Crucial Fed Rate Cut: October Probability Surges to 94%
BitcoinWorld Crucial Fed Rate Cut: October Probability Surges to 94% The financial world is buzzing with a significant development: the probability of a Fed rate cut in October has just seen a dramatic increase. This isn’t just a minor shift; it’s a monumental change that could ripple through global markets, including the dynamic cryptocurrency space. For anyone tracking economic indicators and their impact on investments, this update from the U.S. interest rate futures market is absolutely crucial. What Just Happened? Unpacking the FOMC Statement’s Impact Following the latest Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) statement, market sentiment has decisively shifted. Before the announcement, the U.S. interest rate futures market had priced in a 71.6% chance of an October rate cut. However, after the statement, this figure surged to an astounding 94%. This jump indicates that traders and analysts are now overwhelmingly confident that the Federal Reserve will lower interest rates next month. Such a high probability suggests a strong consensus emerging from the Fed’s latest communications and economic outlook. A Fed rate cut typically means cheaper borrowing costs for businesses and consumers, which can stimulate economic activity. But what does this really signify for investors, especially those in the digital asset realm? Why is a Fed Rate Cut So Significant for Markets? When the Federal Reserve adjusts interest rates, it sends powerful signals across the entire financial ecosystem. A rate cut generally implies a more accommodative monetary policy, often enacted to boost economic growth or combat deflationary pressures. Impact on Traditional Markets: Stocks: Lower interest rates can make borrowing cheaper for companies, potentially boosting earnings and making stocks more attractive compared to bonds. Bonds: Existing bonds with higher yields might become more valuable, but new bonds will likely offer lower returns. Dollar Strength: A rate cut can weaken the U.S. dollar, making exports cheaper and potentially benefiting multinational corporations. Potential for Cryptocurrency Markets: The cryptocurrency market, while often seen as uncorrelated, can still react significantly to macro-economic shifts. A Fed rate cut could be interpreted as: Increased Risk Appetite: With traditional investments offering lower returns, investors might seek higher-yielding or more volatile assets like cryptocurrencies. Inflation Hedge Narrative: If rate cuts are perceived as a precursor to inflation, assets like Bitcoin, often dubbed “digital gold,” could gain traction as an inflation hedge. Liquidity Influx: A more accommodative monetary environment generally means more liquidity in the financial system, some of which could flow into digital assets. Looking Ahead: What Could This Mean for Your Portfolio? While the 94% probability for a Fed rate cut in October is compelling, it’s essential to consider the nuances. Market probabilities can shift, and the Fed’s ultimate decision will depend on incoming economic data. Actionable Insights: Stay Informed: Continue to monitor economic reports, inflation data, and future Fed statements. Diversify: A diversified portfolio can help mitigate risks associated with sudden market shifts. Assess Risk Tolerance: Understand how a potential rate cut might affect your specific investments and adjust your strategy accordingly. This increased likelihood of a Fed rate cut presents both opportunities and challenges. It underscores the interconnectedness of traditional finance and the emerging digital asset space. Investors should remain vigilant and prepared for potential volatility. The financial landscape is always evolving, and the significant surge in the probability of an October Fed rate cut is a clear signal of impending change. From stimulating economic growth to potentially fueling interest in digital assets, the implications are vast. Staying informed and strategically positioned will be key as we approach this crucial decision point. The market is now almost certain of a rate cut, and understanding its potential ripple effects is paramount for every investor. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1: What is the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)? A1: The FOMC is the monetary policymaking body of the Federal Reserve System. It sets the federal funds rate, which influences other interest rates and economic conditions. Q2: How does a Fed rate cut impact the U.S. dollar? A2: A rate cut typically makes the U.S. dollar less attractive to foreign investors seeking higher returns, potentially leading to a weakening of the dollar against other currencies. Q3: Why might a Fed rate cut be good for cryptocurrency? A3: Lower interest rates can reduce the appeal of traditional investments, encouraging investors to seek higher returns in alternative assets like cryptocurrencies. It can also be seen as a sign of increased liquidity or potential inflation, benefiting assets like Bitcoin. Q4: Is a 94% probability a guarantee of a rate cut? A4: While a 94% probability is very high, it is not a guarantee. Market probabilities reflect current sentiment and data, but the Federal Reserve’s final decision will depend on all available economic information leading up to their meeting. Q5: What should investors do in response to this news? A5: Investors should stay informed about economic developments, review their portfolio diversification, and assess their risk tolerance. Consider how potential changes in interest rates might affect different asset classes and adjust strategies as needed. Did you find this analysis helpful? Share this article with your network to keep others informed about the potential impact of the upcoming Fed rate cut and its implications for the financial markets! To learn more about the latest crypto market trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Bitcoin price action. This post Crucial Fed Rate Cut: October Probability Surges to 94% first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Paylaş
Coinstats2025/09/18 02:25