Attorney Jeremy Hogan Doubles Down On Where He Thinks Ripple-SEC Lawsuit Is Heading

[solodeji]

Documents that would prove whether Ripple, the San Francisco-based cross-border payments firm, sold XRP as an unregistered security, are expected to be unsealed today.

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had accused Ripple for the unauthorized sales of XRP, a crypto asset deemed a security by the SEC.

A lot of crypto analysts and pundits believe that the documents could end the lawsuit earlier than expected. And the contents of the documents seem to be in Ripple’s favor.

In a recent live YouTube session anchored by Scott Powell, COO of Wells Fargo, attorney Jeremy Hogan, who has been a stern supporter of Ripple and XRP since the lawsuit was filed in December 2020, discussed how the lawsuit has gone so far and its possible outcome.

Hogan said there is a lot of pieces of evidence to prove the SEC wrong in the court, but only a few of them have been presented before the Judge.

Jeremy Hogan noted:

“There are 100 pieces of evidence out there and we’ve only seen 5 or 10. So far, the litigation has gone very well from Ripple’s perspective, but I’ve only seen five pieces of real hard evidence.”

https://timestabloid.com/attorney-jeremy-doubles-down-on-where-he-thinks-ripple-sec-lawsuit-is-heading/

[thinlyspread]

Massive pinch of salt required when I hear/read anything Hogan says. 

[BillyOckham]

3 hours ago, thinlyspread said:

Massive pinch of salt required when I hear/read anything Hogan says. 

Can you elaborate a bit on that if you have time?  I don’t think I’ve seen him say anything that was dubious.  
 

I’m not a lawyer so I can’t judge if he is incorrect on any points of law,  but I think he has been helpful in explaining the case to lay people like me.

To say “massive grain of salt” indicates you believe he is full of crap.  I’ve seen nothing remotely like that.

 

[thinlyspread]

34 minutes ago, BillyOckham said:

Can you elaborate a bit on that if you have time?  I don’t think I’ve seen him say anything that was dubious.  

I’m not a lawyer so I can’t judge if he is incorrect on any points of law,  but I think he has been helpful in explaining the case to lay people like me.

To say “massive grain of salt” indicates you believe he is full of crap.  I’ve seen nothing remotely like that.

 

I think he's certainly slanted/biased towards Ripple/XRP (like many of us are) – nothing "wrong" with that at all. But his timeline of events has been waaaay off since last year. And I think that sometimes happens when you're not entirely objective. He's still a brilliant watch and insightful on legal process/possibilities, but if he makes any prediction time-wise, I just double it!  

[brianwalden]

24 minutes ago, thinlyspread said:

I think he's certainly slanted/biased towards Ripple/XRP (like many of us are) – nothing "wrong" with that at all. But his timeline of events has been waaaay off since last year. And I think that sometimes happens when you're not entirely objective. He's still a brilliant watch and insightful on legal process/possibilities, but if he makes any prediction time-wise, I just double it!  

I think his timeline was generally accurate if there wasn't all the extensions. I think that anyone who knows a thing about high profile federal cases should have planned for extensions. That may have been an editorial decision on his part. I dunno, I guess it all depends on what you're grading him on.

[Archbob]

Not really, last year he did say there was a decent chance it was going to settle in may, and then in July, and the again in September when there was really no real chance. He's sorel biased. Its pretty obvious.

[HAL1000]