Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The disgraced former lawyer of alleged crypto scam OneCoin has asked a U.S. court to acquit him of the charges, following his conviction as part of a $400 million money laundering operation.
In court papers made public, Mark Scott raised claims via his attorneys about the integrity of the witnesses against him, claiming to have met a number of the individuals cited on only one or two occasions, Finance Magnates reported.
Arguing the evidence presented to the court is insufficient to convict, Scott is asking to be acquitted of the charges.
Scott claims to have been in the dark about the true nature of OneCoin’s operation, maintaining he was unaware of illegal activity within the company. In court, Scott said that only Ruja Ignatova and a handful of senior IT professionals were aware there was no blockchain supporting the project, which Scott maintains proves his innocence.
He also challenged the jurisdiction of the U.S. courts, with few victims of OneCoin based in the U.S. The case was brought on the strength of testimony from Konstantin Ignatova, currently in U.S. custody, and of two investors in the alleged crypto scam.
Scott claims never to have met the investors, nor had any direction interactions with either party. The filing will now be considered by the court, which will decide whether to acquit Scott on the grounds outlined.
Testimony was led showing Scott to have been moving substantial sums of money from the Cayman Islands to the United Arab Emirates, while also moving funds from accounts in the British Virgin Islands.
He is accused of facilitating $400 million of money laundering on behalf of OneCoin, working closely with those at the top of the firm to cover the tracks.
While Konstantin Ignatova is currently in custody, Ruja Ignatova remains at large. She is reported to be in either Athens or Vienna, after disappearing around the time the legal action against OneCoin commenced.
OneCoin maintains it did not intend to scam investors, and Scott’s request for acquittal is consistent with their denials. However, with evidence mounted against him, this will be a decision for the judges,