Oral Arguments and uncertainty in Ian Freeman's Appeal
Ian Freeman's attorney's delivers his appeal at the John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse in Boston.
The Oral Arguments in Ian Freeman's Appeal: A Critical Analysis
On February 5, 2025, oral arguments were held at the First Circuit appellate court at the Moakley Courthouse regarding the case of Ian Freeman. His legal team focused extensively on the registration charge, arguing that the statutory framework for money transmission businesses was not designed to encompass Bitcoin transactions. This article will break down the key points raised during the hearing, the arguments made by both sides, and the potential outcomes of the appeal. The full audio of the hearing can be found here.
The Core Issues at Hand
Ian Freeman’s appeal centers on three primary convictions:
Failure to Register as a Money Transmitting Business – The prosecution contends that Freeman was required to register his Bitcoin business with the federal government, while his defense argues that the law was never intended to apply to cryptocurrency, which did not exist when the statute was enacted.
Income Tax Evasion – The prosecution claims that Freeman failed to pay required taxes, while the defense highlights that even the IRS was uncertain as to whether he actually owed any taxes.
Conspiracy to Launder Money – The most concerning charge, which carries the most severe penalty. However, the defense did not challenge the conspiracy conviction in its appellate brief, a point that has raised significant concerns.
The Argument on Money Transmitting Business Registration
Freeman’s strongest argument pertains to the definition of "funds" in the statute. His defense contends that when the law was originally enacted, Congress had no intention of including digital currency like Bitcoin. One of the appellate judges acknowledged that if Congress were to clarify the law today, that would indicate that the current statute is ambiguous.
The government, however, argues that courts have already held that Bitcoin falls under the definition of "funds" and that the registration requirement should be upheld. This remains a contentious issue, and the decision could go either way.
The Argument on Income Tax Evasion
During the oral arguments, one of the appellate judges raised a significant issue: the prosecution's own IRS witness admitted that they were unsure whether Freeman actually owed taxes. This is a crucial point because, in a criminal case, the burden of proof lies with the government. If they cannot definitively prove that taxes were owed, the charge should not stand. This raises the likelihood that the tax evasion conviction may be overturned.
The Unchallenged Conspiracy to Launder Money Charge
One of the most troubling aspects of the appeal is that Freeman’s defense did not challenge the conspiracy to launder money conviction. Legal analyst Jacob Hornberger expressed concern over this omission, pointing out that this charge alone justifies Freeman’s eight-year sentence. He noted that while appellate briefs have a word limit, Freeman’s defense could have compressed their other arguments to make room for this critical issue.
If the appellate court only overturns the first two charges but leaves the conspiracy charge intact, Freeman could still serve the full sentence. This raises concerns about whether the defense strategy was adequate in fully protecting Freeman’s rights.
Potential Outcomes of the Appeal
There are three possible outcomes from the First Circuit's decision:
Affirming the Conviction – The court could uphold all charges, leaving Freeman to serve his full eight-year sentence.
Overturning Some Charges – The court could strike down the registration and/or tax evasion convictions but leave the conspiracy charge intact. This could lead to either a resentencing hearing or a situation where Freeman still serves eight years solely based on the conspiracy charge.
Ordering a New Trial – If the appellate court finds that the jury’s exposure to improper charges prejudiced the verdict, they could send the case back for a complete retrial. This would be the best possible outcome for Freeman.
The Road Ahead
If Freeman’s appeal is unsuccessful, he still has legal options. He could request a rehearing by the full First Circuit (en banc) or attempt to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, Supreme Court petitions are rarely granted, making this a long shot.
Additionally, there was discussion about the possibility of bail pending appeal. While the court has the authority to release Freeman on an appellate bond, given that a ruling is expected within the next two months, it is unlikely they will grant bail at this stage.
Conclusion
The oral arguments highlighted the complexities of Freeman’s case, particularly regarding the definition of "funds" in the context of Bitcoin. The most pressing concern remains the conspiracy charge, which was left unchallenged in the appellate brief. If the court does not grant a new trial and instead only overturns the registration and tax evasion charges, Freeman could still be forced to serve his full sentence.
Go paid at the $5 a month level, and we will send you both the PDF and e-Pub versions of “Government” - The Biggest Scam in History… Exposed! and a coupon code for 10% off anything in the Government-Scam.com/Store.
Go paid at the $50 a year level, and we will send you a free paperback edition of Etienne’s book “Government” - The Biggest Scam in History… Exposed! OR a 64GB Liberator flash drive if you live in the US. If you are international, we will give you a $10 credit towards shipping if you agree to pay the remainder.
Support us at the $250 Founding Member Level and get a signed high-resolution hardcover of “Government” + Liberator flash drive + Larken Rose’s The Most Dangerous Superstition + Art of Liberty Foundation Stickers delivered anywhere in the world. Our only option for signed copies besides catching Etienne @ an event.