XRP Lawsuit Update: Lawyer Says Ripple Vs. SEC Trial Will Not Happen – Here’s Why

The post XRP Lawsuit Update: Lawyer Says Ripple Vs. SEC Trial Will Not Happen – Here’s Why appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News

The crypto world has been buzzing with speculations about the anticipated SEC vs. Ripple trial, as industry experts attempt to predict the outcome. Despite a summary judgment already being delivered, a jury trial against Ripple’s top brass Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen is slated to take place.

Fred Rispoli Weighs In

Esteemed attorney Fred Rispoli has emerged as a major voice predicting the trial’s non-occurrence. Rispoli’s rationale paints a broader picture of what’s at stake and why the SEC might avoid such a confrontation.

Rispoli believes that targeting Garlinghouse and Larsen wasn’t purely on legal grounds. He opines that the main objective was to corner Ripple into a vulnerable settlement position, by pressuring the key figures of the company.

The Lawyer’s Reasons

Several factors, as per Rispoli, make the SEC’s position really weak:

1. Potential Backfires in Court: The prospect of putting figures like Hinman and Clayton from the SEC on the witness stand, especially in the politically charged environment of New York, presents significant risks. The possible associations to the “Trump Administration” could unfavorably sway the jury.

2. Recklessness Claims: The SEC’s accusation of recklessness in Ripple’s institutional sales might not hold water, considering the broader acceptance of programmatic sales in the industry.

3. Evidence Gaps: Distinguishing domestic from international sales poses a challenge, as the evidence supporting the SEC’s claims on this front appears fragile.

4. Trial Team Reshuffling: Recently, the SEC underwent a major overhaul of its trial team, which could hint at internal issues or lack of preparation.

5. A Hectic Schedule: With a tight sequence of trials for the SEC leading up to the Ripple case, there’s a question of whether they’ll be fully prepared.

Rispoli concludes by highlighting the SEC’s possible strategy of waiting till the last possible moment, leveraging its virtually limitless resources. In typical corporate legal battles, both parties might find it beneficial to settle, avoiding hefty legal fees. The SEC, however, funded by taxpayer money, doesn’t have the same urgency. Yet, as Rispoli points out, if their high-stakes gamble fails, the aftermath will undoubtedly be intriguing.