According to TechFlow, on August 11, Cointelegraph reported that Tornado Cash developer Alexey Pertsev's legal case has entered a critical stage, and he is seeking additional funds to continue fighting for privacy rights and freedom of code release. Pertsev is currently facing a shortage of funds due to a high-stakes legal dispute caused by his arrest two years ago. His support account emphasized this urgent situation on the social platform X, pointing out that Pertsev has run out of funds and urgently needs $750,000 to $1 million to pay for legal fees.
The crypto community has shown strong support for Pertsev and co-developer Roman Storm, who have been accused of money laundering, sanctions violations, and operating an unlicensed money transmission business through Tornado Cash. To support their legal defense, JusticeDAO was formed, which raised more than 654 Ethereum (about $2.3 million) through the decentralized platform Juicebox. In addition, the JusticeDAO page raised another 70 Ethereum. Juicebox has been transparent and disclosed the expenditures of the "Free Alexey & Roman" fund, showing that $1.39 million was spent on legal fees between December 2023 and May 2024.
Despite these efforts, Pertsev's legal battle remains under tremendous financial pressure. He remains incarcerated after being denied bail while his lawyers prepare to appeal the money laundering charges. Pertsev's request was denied, leaving him without access to a computer to prepare for his appeal, making his defense more difficult.
On May 14, 2024, the 's-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal in the Netherlands found Pertsev guilty of money laundering and sentenced him to five years and four months in prison. The court found that he had laundered $1.2 billion through Tornado Cash. Previously, in November 2023, a Dutch court had rejected his request for supervised release on the grounds that he might flee. Pertsev argued at the March trial that he should not be held responsible for his personal conduct in using the Tornado Cash protocol for illegal activities, but the court rejected this argument, arguing that he and his co-founders could have done more to prevent the protocol from being abused.