Ripple Will Eventually Win Against The SEC: Atty. John Deaton
The post Ripple Will Eventually Win Against The SEC: Atty. John Deaton appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News
Popular blockchain lawyer and founder of crypto-laws.us, John E. Deaton, has made strong statements regarding the ongoing lawsuit between Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on the sale of XRP.
In response to a speech by Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse, who blamed the SEC for classifying Ethereum as a non-security and Ripple as a security, Deaton stated that the SEC will not be granted summary judgment on whether Ripple executives engaged in illegal XRP sales.
Deaton argues that the SEC should have informed Ripple executives that XRP is a security during the three meetings they had. As a result, the blockchain lawyer believes that the jury will have an easy time deciding against the SEC on this matter.
The SEC will be denied summary judgment on whether @bgarlinghouse and @chrislarsensf were reckless in not knowing #XRP was a security. The fact that BG met 3X w/the SEC and never once did they say “XRP is a security” is evidence a reasonable jury could conclude he wasn’t reckless https://t.co/X6cQIYWJsc
— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) January 18, 2023
It is important to note that a summary judgment is a decision made by the court based on evidence and statements presented in the legal pleadings without a full trial. When challenged in the comment section that Ripple should have taken advice from its legal team on whether XRP is a security or not, Deaton argued that in that case, the SEC should not have met with crypto executives, including the founders of SBF and ETH.
“According to your logic, the SEC should never have meetings with w/companies at all. Why did the SEC meet 3X with SBFraud? Why did it meet ETH founders 4-6X in 5 months? Why did the SEC agree to meet 3 times w/Garlinghouse and Ripple? The point is that a jury would hear the evidence,” Deaton argued.
Previously, Deaton noted that the SEC lawsuit ought to have classified XRP as security or non-security before 2018.
If SEC enforcement lawyers (the experts who determine what is or isn’t a security) couldn’t make the case #XRP was definitely a security as late as 2018 there’s no way it can prove Larsen and Garlinghouse were reckless in 2013 (or beyond).
— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) February 23, 2022
Moreover, the SEC allowed publicly traded companies Coinbase Global and MoneyGram to sell XRP to investors. As such, Hinman ought to have classified XRP as a non-security together with ETH in his speech according to Deaton.
3) Clayton & Hinman didn’t communicate #XRP was a security during meetings until 4 months before the lawsuit;
4) The SEC allowed it’s staff to own or trade #XRP w/o restriction up until 2019; and
5) It allowed MoneyGram to sell #XRP to retail holders (through (exchanges).
— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) February 23, 2022
Filed under: Bitcoin - @ January 20, 2023 1:17 am