Tether Calls Market Manipulation Allegations ‘Reckless and False’
Once again, Tether ridicules and dismisses allegations that it used its USDT stablecoin for manipulating Bitcoin’s price.
Once again, Tether has ridiculed and dismissed allegations that it used its USDT stablecoin for manipulating Bitcoin’s (BTC) price.
In a statement sent to Cointelegraph on Feb. 28, iFinex, the firm behind Tether, states that the claims in the market manipulation lawsuit against the firm are “reckless and false.” The statement reads:
“The allegations in the complaint are without merit or legal basis, and exhibit a fundamental lack of understanding of the market structure of cryptocurrencies. Indeed, it is reckless and false to allege that USDT tokens are issued in order to manipulate markets.”
Many of the accusations regarding Tether’s purported price manipulation are based on the academic paper “Is Bitcoin Really Un-tethered?” by John M. Griffin and Amin Shams which was first published in June 2018. The paper stated that Tether influenced Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency prices during the 2017 boom.
Regarding the paper, Tether’s general counsel Stuart Hoegner commented:
“These now amalgamated copycat lawsuits are baseless and rely on a foundationally flawed paper by John M. Griffin and Amin Shams that lacks data and evidence to support incendiary allegations. […] Sadly, the claims are nothing more than a shameless money grab.”
Law firms fought over control of the case
On Monday, Roche Cyrulnik Freedman LLP was appointed as the lead counsel for plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit after several different legal teams fought for the role.
The cryptocurrency community paid close attention to the fight between the law firms, with Bitcoin influencer Andreas Antonopoulos recently expressing support for one of the legal teams.
Hoegner claims that the legal teams attempting to take over the case are “poking huge holes in each others’ legal theories and evidentiary footing,” and said that it is irrelevant who leads the counsel:
“Whoever serves as lead interim counsel is irrelevant, as the claim rests on the defective research and methodology of a paper whose authors openly admit they do not have crucial data […] to prove actual purchases of bitcoin with Tether. ”
