- The Core Allegations Against Tornado Cash
- DOJ Accused of Distorting and Concealing Evidence
- Defense Rights Allegedly Undermined
- Public and Expert Community Reactions
In recent years, cryptocurrency services that offer transactional privacy have come under intense scrutiny from regulators and law enforcement worldwide. One of the most high-profile cases is the ongoing trial of Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash, a decentralized Ethereum-based mixer. By July 2025, the case reached a critical point: Storm and his legal team publicly accused the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) of distorting and withholding key evidence — a move they say could significantly impact the fairness and outcome of the trial.
The Core Allegations Against Tornado Cash
Tornado Cash is a protocol that allows users to anonymize their crypto transactions by breaking the on-chain link between sender and receiver. Originally designed to enhance privacy on the blockchain, the service soon attracted regulatory attention. In 2023, the DOJ charged Roman Storm and his colleagues with money laundering, sanctions violations, and operating an unlicensed money transmission business. Prosecutors allege that billions of dollars were laundered through the protocol, including funds tied to the North Korean hacker group Lazarus.
DOJ Accused of Distorting and Concealing Evidence
A key point of contention in the case involves a Telegram message cited by the prosecution. According to the DOJ, the message—related to the $600 million hack of Axie Infinity—was written by a Tornado Cash developer. However, the defense team claims the message was actually forwarded by someone else and merely appeared in a Tornado Cash chat, raising concerns about how digital evidence is being interpreted and extracted.
Storm’s lawyers argue that investigators failed to reliably determine the message’s authorship or verify the completeness and authenticity of the extracted data. They also claim the DOJ relied on materials from Dutch authorities, who allegedly did not grant full access to the suspect’s device—rendering the evidence incomplete and potentially unreliable.
Another major accusation is the DOJ’s alleged suppression of exculpatory evidence—information that could help clear the defendant. According to the defense, as early as 2023, prosecutors were aware that non-custodial crypto mixers like Tornado Cash might not legally qualify as “money transmitters” under U.S. law. This information reportedly came from a phone call between prosecutors and officials at the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), but was not shared with the defense until much later.
Such suppression may constitute a Brady violation, a serious breach in U.S. legal practice that, if proven, could lead to a conviction being overturned or the case being dismissed.
Defense Rights Allegedly Undermined
Roman Storm also claims that the DOJ has obstructed his right to a full defense by blocking the participation of independent experts. Out of six proposed specialists, five were excluded from testifying after objections from the prosecution — including a blockchain expert who could have explained the technical workings of Tornado Cash. This, according to the defense, limits their ability to present alternative interpretations of the protocol’s purpose and functionality.
Public and Expert Community Reactions
The Tornado Cash case has sparked wide debate in the crypto and legal communities. Many experts view it as a landmark trial that could set a precedent for how developers of decentralized protocols are held accountable and how the DeFi sector is regulated. Some support the DOJ’s actions as necessary to combat money laundering and terrorism financing. Others warn that the case sets a dangerous precedent for innovation, and may discourage open-source development in the crypto space.
One focal point is the legal status of non-custodial protocols. If the court determines that Tornado Cash operates as a “money transmitter,” it could open the door to regulatory action against similar services. On the other hand, if the defense can prove that the DOJ manipulated or suppressed critical evidence, it could lead to the charges being reduced—or Storm being acquitted altogether.
Conclusion
The Tornado Cash trial is more than just one developer’s fight for justice—it’s a pivotal moment in defining the legal landscape for decentralized technologies. The DOJ’s alleged distortion and concealment of evidence raises serious questions about transparency and fairness in the judicial process, as well as the delicate balance between law enforcement and the protection of innovation. The outcome of this case could shape the future not only for Tornado Cash, but for the entire decentralized finance ecosystem and privacy-focused crypto tools.
