Ripple News: Will Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen’s Trial Impact the SEC’s Appeal? – Coinpedia Fintech News

A federal judge has given the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) the go-ahead to appeal a decision that said Ripple didn’t break securities laws by offering XRP to retail traders on exchanges. The SEC has until Friday to submit the motion, and if it’s accepted, they can ask an appeals court for permission to proceed with the appeal.

However, pro-XRP lawyer Fred Rispoli has shed light on whether the whole appeal fiasco has anything to do with the ongoing trial of Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen. 

The host of Thinking Crypto asked Rispoli about the potential impact of the ongoing trial involving Brad and Chris on the SEC’s appeal. He questioned whether this trial was different from the main proceedings and if it was a separate branch stemming from the prior events. 

Rispoli responded, explaining that this trial was derivative in nature, connected to the central factual events related to Ripple’s actions, the use and distribution of XRP, and the roles of the company’s executives. He said that the central legal issues had already been settled, and the addition of Brad and Chris was more about intimidation due to the weak case against them.

Rispoli further highlighted that the SEC might not be as focused on pursuing Brad and Chris as they are on other aspects. However, he suggested that if programmatic sales and other distribution methods were reintroduced into the case, the SEC would have more evidence to present to a jury, assuming an overturn of the appeal and Judge Torres’ decision. Despite this, he noted that since the key legal matters had already been decided, the situation remained unresolved and somewhat undesirable for the SEC.

He said, ‘There’s definitely money at stake and it’s not small potatoes to Brad and Chris, but the legal issues were the key facts of the case and those have already been decided.’ I always think a lot of other legal minds on this was adding Brad and Chris was just to intimidate and scare and there was a very weak case. So I don’t think the SEC is as invested in going after those two as they are now, unless it gets a little bit better.”
Source: Read Full Article