Jump to content

Did the SEC Break the Law Protecting Attorney-Client Confidentiality?


Recommended Posts

How did the SEC obtain documents detailing legal advice between Ripple and its lawyers from 2012? 

Very interesting question highlighted in this Reuter’s piece: At the heart of the SEC’s case against Ripple, a dispute over legal advice

The SEC case is weak already.

I don’t think the judge will care very much for these shenanigans.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RobertHarpool said:

How did the SEC obtain documents detailing legal advice between Ripple and its lawyers from 2012? 

My opinion is that Jed McCaleb, one of the founding members who sought this legal advice gave it to them willingly (probably under an agreement that he be granted immunity in any litigation resulting from it.)     Yet another way for him to stick it to Ripple.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, RobertHarpool said:

How did the SEC obtain documents detailing legal advice between Ripple and its lawyers from 2012? 

Very interesting question highlighted in this Reuter’s piece: At the heart of the SEC’s case against Ripple, a dispute over legal advice

The SEC case is weak already.

I don’t think the judge will care very much for these shenanigans.

 

To accuse Ripple of playing dirty, SEC are playing dirty. 

@Pablo Have you a comment; this is not a good look.  Is evidence gained in this way admissible.  To allow such evidence in a court seems to go against the principles of justice in a democratic society?.

Is it even legal for the prosecution to go after, and publish the legal advice of the defence?

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, RobertHarpool said:

documents detailing legal advice between Ripple and its lawyers from 2012

And who says this was the ONLY advice they got? On such important matter it's not unusual to go for second or even third opinions. The SEC never can make it a hard proof that this was the only advice Ripple Labs decision was based on to see XRP as NOT an investment contract and therefor NOT a security.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, kanaas said:

And who says this was the ONLY advice they got? On such important matter it's not unusual to go for second or even third opinions. The SEC never can make it a hard proof that this was the only advice Ripple Labs decision was based on to see XRP as NOT an investment contract and therefor NOT a security.

Excellent point.........advice is only advice.  Are we to be convicted for what we hear?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, kanaas said:

And who says this was the ONLY advice they got? On such important matter it's not unusual to go for second or even third opinions. The SEC never can make it a hard proof that this was the only advice Ripple Labs decision was based on to see XRP as NOT an investment contract and therefor NOT a security.

Most obviously even if Ripple sought SEC input in 2012, they wouldn't have gotten an answer until 2020 anyhow. 

I've personally asked the SEC a couple times over the years and got nowhere. 

The SEC's posturing on this aspect of the issue is pathetic....and possibly illegal. 

Edited by RobertHarpool
Link to post
Share on other sites

Without that clarity from the SEC how were the legal team to know for sure - they would have given the most cautious answer. Where would we be if nobody took risks. I don't hold it against Ripple if this is what the did. Let's face it the SEC are a total joke, an absolute clown show. If they provided up to date (on crypto) clarity this sort of thing wouldn't happen.

Edited by Xrpdude
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

To accuse Ripple of playing dirty, SEC are playing dirty. 

@Pablo Have you a comment; this is not a good look.  Is evidence gained in this way admissible.  To allow such evidence in a court seems to go against the principles of justice in a democratic society?.

Is it even legal for the prosecution to go after, and publish the legal advice of the defence?

This is one of the first things I picked up. It's a really big deal.

See my response from December:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.