SEC vs. Ripple Case: Experts Believe SEC at a Disadvantage

• According to Scott Chamberlain, the recent Ripple vs. SEC judgment resulted in no advantage for either party.
• SEC’s expert witness, Patrick Doody, was excluded from the case.
• The exclusion of Doody leaves the SEC without a key witness.

Neither the SEC nor the XRP community appears to have gained an advantage from the recent judgment, according to Ex-attorney and Evernode XRPL co-founder Scott Chamberlain. Chamberlain’s comments followed a recent judgment from Judge Analisa Torres, allowing and dismissing parts of both parties’ motions (known as “Daubert” motions) in equal measure.

Expert testimony is crucial for Ripple and the SEC to support their claims and evidence regarding XRP. Neither the SEC nor the XRP community appears to have gained an advantage from this judgment since the judge allowed and dismissed parts of both parties’ motions.

One of the most significant outcomes of the verdict was that Patrick Doody, the leading expert witness, was excluded from the case. The SEC had contracted with this firm to investigate investors’ expectations for XRP.

Another unfortunate consequence of the Daubert challenges was that SEC attorneys attempted to have Judge Torres exclude John E. Deaton, an attorney for the XRP community, from participating in the lawsuit in part because Deaton had disclosed the name of the SEC’s expert witness. However, the judge did not ban Deaton but instead agreed with him that Doody should not testify for XRP holders in court.

Deaton also expressed his opinion on Twitter, backing Chamberlin. “I believe the expert’s preclusion is fatal for the SEC’s summary judgment motion,” he said.

XRP community attorney Jeremy Hogan voiced similar opinions, stating that the SEC must demonstrate that investors had a “responsible” expectation of profits from Ripple’s efforts and that Doody was key in establishing this.

“And the Judge just struck the SEC’s ONLY Expert Witness on that subject. So, now, how the heck can the SEC prove “reasonable” reliance? Who will testify?” Hogan wrote.

While the judge ruled in favor of SEC in regard to expert witness number 3, which Ripple had deemed “irrelevant and unreasonably prejudicial,” Hogan believes,“Expert #3’s opinion as to Ripple’s incentives and actions to influence XRP price is relevant to the issue of reasonable expectation of profits.” However, according to him, that’s “weak sauce,” implying that it won’t be much useful in the case.