TLDR
- Roman Storm’s lawyers are considering a mistrial motion after a government witness testified about losing $190,000 in a crypto scam that may not have involved Tornado Cash
- Blockchain experts Taylor Monahan and ZachXBT analyzed the transaction data and concluded Lin’s stolen funds never went through Tornado Cash
- The government witness Hanfeng Lin hired crypto recovery service Payback, which claimed her funds traveled through Tornado Cash, but on-chain evidence disputes this
- FBI crypto expert Joseph DeCapua testified he was not told to analyze Lin’s specific transactions, creating gaps in the prosecution’s case
- Storm faces up to 45 years in prison on charges of money laundering conspiracy and sanctions violations related to co-founding Tornado Cash
Roman Storm’s legal team is weighing a mistrial motion after questions arose about a key government witness’s testimony in the high-profile Tornado Cash case. The crypto mixer co-founder’s lawyers claim the witness testimony has no connection to their client’s platform.
Storm faces up to 45 years in prison on charges including money laundering conspiracy, sanctions violations, and operating an unlicensed money transmitting business. He was charged in 2023 alongside fellow co-founder Roman Semenov, who remains in Russia and has not appeared in court.
The controversy centers on testimony from Hanfeng Lin, a Taiwan-born woman who lost approximately $190,000 to $250,000 in a romance scam in 2021 and 2022. Lin told the Manhattan federal court she was approached online by scammers who convinced her to buy Bitcoin through exchanges and send it to fake trading sites.
After losing her funds, Lin hired crypto recovery service Payback to trace her stolen money. The company provided a report claiming some of her Bitcoin traveled through Tornado Cash, the privacy-focused Ethereum mixer that Storm co-created.
Storm’s defense attorney David Patton challenged this claim in court Monday. He told Judge Katherine Polk Failla that weekend research showed no evidence Lin’s funds ever touched Tornado Cash, raising the possibility of seeking a mistrial.
Blockchain Experts Challenge Government’s Case
Independent blockchain researchers have backed up the defense’s claims with detailed on-chain analysis. Taylor Monahan, principal security researcher at MetaMask, posted her findings on social media Friday showing Lin’s stolen funds never went to Tornado Cash.
This first witness in Roman's trial immediately caught my attention bc the victim was a classic Pig Butchering case.
The only issue is….uh…..those scammers don't use Tornado Cash? And they never have?
So, like, wtf? https://t.co/27MlcXvc0z
— Tay 💖 (@tayvano_) July 18, 2025
Monahan traced the scammers’ transactions and found they converted Lin’s Bitcoin to Ether through standard exchanges. She concluded that Payback’s analysis was flawed and criticized the company’s tracing methods.
ZachXBT, a well-known pseudonymous blockchain analyst, agreed with Monahan’s conclusions. He criticized Payback’s analysis, questioning how a professional firm could make such basic tracing errors when following transactions from theft addresses.
The FBI’s crypto tracing expert, Special Agent Joseph DeCapua, testified that he was not instructed to analyze Lin’s specific transactions. This created another gap in the prosecution’s case, as Storm’s lawyers expected DeCapua to connect Lin’s funds to Tornado Cash.
Government Promises Additional Evidence
Prosecutors said they plan to call IRS analyst Stephan George to testify about Lin’s funds reaching Tornado Cash. Assistant U.S. attorney Thane Rehn told the court that George would show “the few short hops to Tornado Cash” in Lin’s case.
Judge Failla expressed frustration with the apparent lack of coordination between prosecution witnesses. She commented that she had never seen such communication gaps in criminal cases she has overseen.
Payback, the crypto recovery service Lin used, has faced scrutiny from federal authorities. The FBI’s San Diego Field Office seized the company’s website in 2024 as part of efforts to combat scams targeting cryptocurrency fraud victims.
A mistrial would invalidate Storm’s current proceedings due to judicial error or improper evidence admission. The case could then be dismissed entirely or retried with new judge and jury members.
The prosecution maintains they will present evidence showing Lin’s stolen cryptocurrency did pass through Tornado Cash, setting up a key battle over technical evidence that could determine the trial’s outcome.
