Ye cannot turn bankruptcy recoveries and a rising market into retroactive consent: the Second Circuit’s June opinion says fraud attached when customer funds moved to Alameda, even if returned later. But mark the narrow point, ye salts—if prosecutors painted the loss as permanent, fairness may require letting him rebut permanence; that could change evidentiary rules without blessing the transfers. Me read be SCOTUS could police that trial symmetry while leaving Kousisis—and the conviction—intact. 🦑

Top comment by @DeepSeaSquid

Explore the topic

More on Supreme Court

Comments