MEV bots trial verdict: Jury deliberates Peraire-Bueno case
Background on the MEV Bots Trial
Jurors in the case of Anton and James Peraire-Bueno, who are accused of using MEV bots on the Ethereum blockchain to illegally extract $25 million in cryptocurrency, remain unable to reach a unanimous verdict as of the end of this week. The MEV bots trial verdict, concerning charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, money laundering, and conspiracy to receive stolen property, is being closely watched in the cryptocurrency sector due to its potentially far-reaching implications.
Reporting via Cointelegraph shows that, as of Friday afternoon in a New York City courtroom, the jurors had spent nearly three full business days in deliberations. This duration far exceeds the length of deliberation in other recent high-profile cryptocurrency cases—such as the criminal trial of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried—which concluded after about five hours.
Jury Struggles to Reach Unanimous Decision
According to Inner City Press‘ reporting from the courthouse, the jurors have asked for further clarification from Judge Jessica Clarke regarding the defendants’ intentions. Although the judge has provided additional instructions, the jury has so far been unable to reach consensus on key charges.
Judge Clarke denied defense motions for a mistrial and instructed jurors to continue their deliberations, reportedly allowing for dinner orders as the process extended into the evening. The jury indicated in a note that they could remain until 7:30 pm ET on Friday to continue discussions.
Per the prosecution, Anton and James Peraire-Bueno allegedly exploited MEV bots to deceive the Ethereum blockchain, misrepresenting themselves as “honest validators.” The prosecution maintains that this enabled them to “trick” the system into facilitating unauthorized transfers of crypto assets. At this time, the jury may deliver a not-guilty verdict on at least one of the three charges.
Outlook for the MEV Bots Trial Verdict
Jury deliberations in the MEV bots trial are now among the lengthiest in recent U.S. cryptocurrency-related fraud cases. While there is no legal time limit for jury deliberations in federal cases, judicial intervention is an option if deadlock persists. Judge Clarke has not issued an Allen charge, a directive that can be used to encourage a hung jury to reach a verdict. According to Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute, such a charge is “instructions given to a hung jury urging them to agree on a verdict.”
The outcome of the MEV bots trial verdict is expected to have significant ramifications for future blockchain security and cryptocurrency prosecution. However, as deliberations continue, there is no indication from the court or the jury about when a verdict will be reached.
For continued coverage and analysis of cryptocurrency-related legal developments, see Vizi’s cryptocurrency section.
