Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash, stood before a federal jury in Manhattan on August 6, 2025. The high-stakes trial sought to determine whether he was guilty of money laundering and sanctions violations, but the case ended with a partial verdict — the jury couldn’t reach a unanimous decision.

Although Storm faced the possibility of up to 20 years in prison, he was ultimately found guilty on just one lesser charge: conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmission business, which carries a maximum sentence of five years.

Tornado Cash: Privacy Tool or Laundering Machine?

According to prosecutors, Tornado Cash became a haven for cybercriminals, who used it to launder over $1 billion in stolen crypto assets, including funds linked to the notorious North Korean Lazarus Group.

Storm faced serious charges, including money laundering and violating international sanctions, both carrying sentences of up to 20 years. But after more than three weeks of proceedings, the jury failed to agree on those major charges, leading the judge to dismiss the panel.

Final Verdict: One Guilty Count, No Consensus on the Rest

In the end, Roman Storm was convicted on only one count — conspiring to operate an unlicensed money transmission service. Despite avoiding the most severe penalties, Storm appeared visibly dejected when the verdict was read.

He was not taken into custody after the verdict, though prosecutors argued he poses a flight risk due to his ties to Russia and access to millions of dollars in Ethereum.

The Defense: Tornado Cash Was Not Made for Crime

Storm’s legal team insisted that Tornado Cash was designed as a legitimate tool for blockchain privacy, and that developers shouldn't be held liable for how others use their code.

They sought to introduce private messages showing Storm’s own concern about the protocol being misused by bad actors. However, Judge Katherine Polk Failla excluded these messages, calling them irrelevant.

The judge argued that the messages did not reflect Storm’s intent at the time he helped build the protocol. Storm’s lawyers countered that the evidence would have shown he never meant for the tool to be used by criminals.

The Bigger Question: Can Developers Be Held Accountable?

This case reignites a long-running debate in tech and legal circles: Should developers be held responsible for how people use open-source tools?

Storm and his defense argue that once a decentralized protocol is launched, its creators cannot control how it is used. But prosecutors claim Storm knowingly marketed Tornado Cash as a money laundering solution — and must therefore be held accountable.

To secure a conviction on the more serious charges, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Storm created and operated Tornado Cash specifically to facilitate cybercrime.

Storm maintains that he built Tornado Cash for users who value privacy on the blockchain, and that he had no control over who used it or why.

A Precedent the Crypto World Is Watching Closely

The trial has drawn intense scrutiny from across the crypto industry. Its outcome could set a legal precedent defining how developers of decentralized applications are treated under U.S. law, especially regarding user conduct.

For now, the jury’s partial verdict has left more questions than answers — and if no settlement is reached, another round in court may be coming.


#TornadoCash , #Cryptolaw , #MoneyLaundering , #CryptoCrime , #Web3Security

Stay one step ahead – follow our profile and stay informed about everything important in the world of cryptocurrencies!

Notice:

,,The information and views presented in this article are intended solely for educational purposes and should not be taken as investment advice in any situation. The content of these pages should not be regarded as financial, investment, or any other form of advice. We caution that investing in cryptocurrencies can be risky and may lead to financial losses.“