Twister Money co-founder Roman Storm is ready to face trial on Monday within the Southern District of New York (SDNY) on federal fees that might put him behind bars for greater than 40 years.
Prosecutors allege he conspired to launder cash, violated US sanctions and operated an unlicensed money-transmitting enterprise stemming from his function in creating Twister Money, an open-source protocol that enables customers to hide blockchain transactions — whether or not for privateness or to obscure illicit exercise.
On the coronary heart of Storm’s protection is the argument that Twister Money is just not a enterprise however a decentralized and immutable protocol that he not managed. Additionally, code is taken into account protected speech underneath the First Modification within the US.
The trial finally hinges on whether or not Storm’s actions amounted to protected speech or crossed into legal conduct.
Listed below are the important thing info to grasp earlier than Storm faces the courtroom.
Why is Twister Money’s Roman Storm on trial?
Storm moved to the US from Russia in 2008 and later grew to become a US citizen. In a current interview with “Crypto In America,” he mentioned the freedoms granted to people within the US deeply resonated with him and had been a key motivator for his transfer.
Whereas working as a software program engineer in San Francisco in 2014, he found Bitcoin and was “blown away” by the thought of transacting freely with others on a decentralized community.
In 2019, Storm attended a convention representing his consulting agency, PepperSec. He met Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin, who inspired him to discover privateness in blockchain functions. That dialog finally led to Storm co-creating Twister Money with Alexey Pertsev and Roman Semenov.
Pertsev was discovered responsible of cash laundering within the Netherlands and is presently interesting the choice. Semenov stays at giant and is on the US Federal Bureau of Investigation’s wished listing.
Launched in 2019, Twister Money is a software designed to obscure blockchain transaction histories. When a consumer deposits crypto into the protocol, it generates a secret code that enables them to later withdraw the identical quantity to a unique pockets tackle. As a result of deposits and withdrawals are recorded as separate transactions, they’re tougher to hint than typical blockchain transactions.
It rapidly attracted illicit customers, together with North Korean hackers, prompting the US Treasury’s Workplace of Overseas Belongings Management (OFAC) to impose sanctions on the protocol in 2022. Nonetheless, in March 2025, these sanctions had been reversed following a civil problem in Van Loon v. Division of the Treasury, introduced by Twister Money customers.
Decide Katherine Failla, who’s presiding over Storm’s case, not too long ago mentioned she was “inclined” to exclude the 2022 sanctions from the trial.
Associated: From Sony to Bybit: How Lazarus Group grew to become crypto’s supervillain
Failla has beforehand overseen main cryptocurrency instances, together with the dismissal of a class-action lawsuit towards decentralized change Uniswap and the Securities and Trade Fee’s (SEC) now-dropped lawsuit towards Coinbase.
Twister Money’s decentralization is central to the protection
Storm is being prosecuted by a group skilled in crypto crime: Thane Rehn and Benjamin Gianforti, assistant US attorneys within the SDNY. Gianforti secured convictions within the IcomTech and Forcount crypto Ponzi instances. Rehn was the prosecutor towards FTX.
In Storm’s nook, he’s represented by a authorized group led by Brian Klein of Waymaker LLP and David Patton of Hecker Fink LLP. Klein is a white-collar protection legal professional identified for high-profile crypto instances, together with his work defending Mango Markets exploiter Avi Eisenberg and crypto change Kraken. Patton, a federal trial lawyer, has represented main crypto figures corresponding to Terraform Labs co-founder Kwon Do-hyung, higher generally known as Do Kwon.
The protection argues that their consumer can’t be held accountable for how Twister Money was used as a result of the protocol is decentralized and past his management. In Might 2020, Twister Money builders started relinquishing management and moved towards a totally decentralized system.
In line with the protection, Storm merely wrote and revealed open-source code. He didn’t run a enterprise, provide a service or handle clients. They cite a 2019 Monetary Crimes Enforcement Community (FinCEN) steerage that mentioned builders of anonymizing software program weren’t required to register as cash transmitters.
That argument has gained traction in associated instances. In Van Loon v. Division of the Treasury, the Fifth Circuit dominated that Twister Money’s immutable sensible contracts weren’t “property” topic to US sanctions.
In Storm’s personal case, corporations like Paradigm have filed amicus briefs urging the courtroom to weigh the broader penalties of prosecuting open-source software program builders. The Blockchain Affiliation, Digital Frontier Basis, Coin Heart and DeFi Training Fund have additionally submitted briefs in his protection. A authorized fundraiser supporting his case has raised $1.96 million on the time of writing.
“Roman wrote and deployed open-source code. He didn’t launder funds or run a enterprise,” Amal Ibraymi, authorized counsel at Ethereum privateness community Aztec Labs, informed Cointelegraph.
“Prosecuting him for others’ use of that code dangers setting a deeply regarding benchmark the place writing code for privateness instruments turns into a authorized legal responsibility even when that code is public, permissionless and never underneath the developer’s management.”
In the meantime, the prosecution’s indictment distinguishes Twister Money’s immutable sensible contracts and its frontend interface. Prosecutors allege that Storm and his co-founders paid for US-based internet hosting and maintained an internet site that allowed customers to work together with the protocol. They declare the builders retained the flexibility to switch the UI at will.
Associated: Bitcoin to profit from Trump’s ‘Large Stunning Invoice,’ analysts predict
A key growth has been the Trump administration’s crypto-friendly stance in comparison with that of Joe Biden’s. Throughout the Biden period, the Securities and Trade Fee confronted criticism for its “regulation by enforcement” method; nevertheless, the company has since dropped a number of main crypto instances — together with some earlier than Decide Failla.
Below the Trump administration was the Division of Justice’s (DOJ) April Blanche Memo. It instructed federal prosecutors to keep away from bringing regulatory fees in digital asset instances — corresponding to for unlicensed cash transmission — except they’ll present the defendant acted willfully and knew of any licensing necessities.
“The Blanche Memo makes clear that the DOJ shouldn’t prioritize instances towards builders of open-source, general-purpose instruments with out clear legal intent,” Ibraymi mentioned. “For this protection group, this presents a powerful argument that the prosecution contradicts the DOJ’s personal steerage.”
Twister Money trial within the US might affect Dutch enchantment
Twister Money co-founder Pertsev was discovered responsible of cash laundering by a Dutch courtroom in 2024 and sentenced to over 5 years in jail. His conviction was primarily based largely on the identical argument now being made by US prosecutors.
Nonetheless, the authorized framing within the US might sway Pertsev’s enchantment course of within the Netherlands. Pertsev’s authorized group is presently difficult the ruling, arguing that the protocol’s immutability and decentralization make it basically completely different from an organization or custodial service.
If Storm is acquitted, or if the US courtroom affirms that writing open-source code is protected speech, it could bolster the protection’s argument that Pertsev was wrongly held accountable for the autonomous actions of a decentralized protocol.
“There’s little question that prosecutors in each nations are watching these instances carefully. However that scrutiny cuts each methods, and robust authorized arguments made in a single case may also help reinforce the protection within the different,” Ibraymi mentioned.
“Specifically, with the Fifth Circuit already affirming key ideas round decentralization and code, there’s rising momentum to push again towards efforts to criminalize builders for constructing instruments they don’t management,” she added.
European courts usually are not sure by US selections, however the high-profile nature of the case and its implications for builders globally imply that Storm’s trial is being watched carefully by privateness advocates, authorized students and regulators throughout jurisdictions.
The case towards Storm finally exams whether or not publishing open-source privateness software program could be thought of legal conduct when that code is later used for illicit functions. The prosecution argues that Storm knowingly facilitated cash laundering past coding itself, corresponding to by means of the undertaking’s consumer interface.
The protection maintains that he merely wrote decentralized code that now operates past his management. In a late twist, additionally they accused prosecutors of misrepresenting key Telegram proof, saying the federal government solely disclosed crucial metadata — displaying a reporter’s message was forwarded by Storm, not authored. His trial begins Monday within the SDNY.
Journal: Inside a 30,000 cellphone bot farm stealing crypto airdrops from actual customers
