- The SEC has submitted documents for in-camera review.
- The documents are related to Bill Hinman’s speech from 2018.
- Documents submitted are categorized into three sections.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has submitted three categories of documents related to its motion to the court for in-camera review, claiming that the attorney-client privilege protects internal documents pertaining to Hinman’s speech.
#XRPCommunity #XRP #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP The SEC has submitted to the Court for in camera review three categories of documents related to its motion asserting that the attorney-client privilege protects internal documents related to Hinman’s speech.https://t.co/gpDXEKMQro
— James K. Filan 103k+ (beware of imposters) (@FilanLaw) June 16, 2022
The three documents are related to the infamous speech of Bill Hinman from 2018. The SEC has categorized the submission under three different categories.
On June 14, 2022, the court ordered the SEC to produce internal documents to support its claim that the attorney-client privilege protects them.
This current submission is categorized into three sections. The first set contains David Frederickson’s emails discussing legal issues for the speech. The legal advice given to Hinman relating to the speech is also included in the submission.
The second category includes memos of emails from June 2018, which were sent from Hinman’s counsel. Hinman, Frederickson, and Szczepanik received these emails from Hinman’s Counsel, Michael Seaman. The email includes an attachment with drafts of speech which includes the legal advice from various divisions of SEC.
The third and final category of submissions includes the email sent by Hinman to the attorney’s TM, IM, and OGC. The attached draft is similar to the one sent to Hinman by Seaman on June 11, 2018. It also includes emails regarding the final comments.
For context: SEC sued Labs in 2020 for issuing and selling unlicensed securities — XRP tokens — to the public. Ripple has argued that the selling of XRP complied with the law.
William Hinman’s 2018 speech, in which he stated that Ethereum is not a security, has played a significant role in the case. The defendants have repeatedly sought the Commission to draw a line between Ripple’s XRP and Ethereum’s ETH, using the same rhetoric in their stride. The judge also found the speech to be “very relevant” to the case.
Continue reading on CoinQuora