Jurors Report Deadlock After Three Days
Jurors deliberating in the U.S. government’s case against brothers Anton and James Peraire-Bueno are struggling to reach a unanimous decision after three days of discussion, according to court reporting from Inner City Press in New York. The brothers face federal charges tied to their use of maximal extractable value (MEV) bots on the Ethereum blockchain. The panel sent a note to U.S. District Judge Jessica Clarke on Friday asking for additional clarification about the defendants’ intentions. The judge declined a defense motion for a mistrial and instructed the jurors to continue deliberating. Clarke reportedly told them to order dinner and keep working into the evening.
Possible Split Verdict
The jurors appear divided on at least one of the counts, which include conspiracy to commit wire fraud, money laundering, and conspiracy to receive stolen property. Reporters inside the courtroom said the note from the jury suggested “issues reaching a unanimous verdict.” Judge Clarke denied defense requests for a mistrial, instead reminding jurors of their duty to reach consensus “if possible.” The court has not yet issued an Allen charge—a formal instruction urging a deadlocked jury to seek agreement—but could do so if the stalemate continues into next week.
Case Background and Charges
Prosecutors allege the brothers exploited Ethereum’s transaction ordering system to extract $25 million in cryptocurrency in 2023 using MEV bots. The government argues they misrepresented themselves as “honest validators” and manipulated pending transactions for profit. Defense attorneys countered that the actions were part of the blockchain’s open, permissionless environment and did not constitute fraud. The case is one of the first criminal prosecutions to focus on MEV extraction, a controversial practice where traders compete to capture value by reordering or inserting transactions on a blockchain. The outcome could set a benchmark for how similar algorithmic trading behavior is treated under U.S. law.
Lengthy Deliberations Highlight Complexity
The jury’s prolonged deliberations — nearly three full business days as of Friday — underline the technical and legal complexity of the case. By comparison, the jury in the Sam Bankman-Fried trial at the same Manhattan federal court reached a verdict in about five hours last year. Legal observers said the contrast reflects how difficult it is to apply existing fraud statutes to decentralized, code-driven systems like Ethereum. There is no set time limit for jury deliberations, though a judge may intervene if a panel indicates it is hopelessly deadlocked. The jurors in this case told the court they were willing to continue until at least 7:30 p.m. Friday. Judge Clarke is expected to decide next steps if no verdict is reached before the weekend.
What Comes Next
If jurors remain unable to agree, Judge Clarke could declare a mistrial, giving prosecutors the option to retry the case. A verdict either way would carry weight across the crypto industry, as MEV extraction remains a gray area between opportunistic trading and market manipulation. At publication time, deliberations were ongoing. The court has not indicated when a final decision may come, leaving one of the most closely watched blockchain-related criminal cases in recent memory unresolved heading into the weekend.
Investor Takeaway
The Peraire-Bueno case is testing how U.S. courts classify complex blockchain activity such as MEV extraction — a precedent that could influence future crypto prosecutions.
Investor Takeaway
A hung jury could delay clarity on how U.S. prosecutors apply wire fraud and money-laundering laws to algorithmic behavior on public blockchains.