Reasoning by analogy: Can a jury understand Ethereum?
The trial of Anton and James Peraire-Bueno in the Southern District of New York raises questions about whether blockchain code can be deemed law. The brothers are accused of stealing $25 million in ETH through unethical practices involving Ethereum's system. The prosecution claims they used deception to exploit unsuspecting MEV sandwich bots, while the defense argues they played by Ethereum's established rules, likening their actions to stealing a base in baseball. As the jury deliberates on wire fraud and money laundering charges, both sides present complex technical concepts using analogies that may or may not resonate with jurors. The defense relates Ethereum's block-building to cooking, while the prosecution makes less appetizing comparisons. With high stakes—including potential prison time for the defendants—a guilty verdict could signal to the crypto community that Ethereum lacks the integrity to self-regulate, thereby inviting U.S. legal scrutiny. Ultimately, the jury's understanding of Ethereum's mechanics could impact the case's outcome significantly.
Source 🔗