The statement made by the Investment Banker Declarant in support of the SEC has received a response to Ripple’s objection to the request to redact his personal information. James K. Filan, a prominent Ripple Pro attorney, tweeted about the development yesterday.
Read more: Could Ripple Win the SEC Lawsuit? Attorney Deaton Explains
Response From Investment Banker Declarant
Investment banker Declarant claimed Ripple failed to make a compelling case to override its “strong privacy and safety interests” in permitting the specifically targeted redactions.
Even though Ripple used “voluntariness” as its primary defense, it was argued that Ripple failed to provide an objective reason for refusing to provide leave to redact. The Investment Banker further pointed out that rejecting a request from the SEC is challenging because the declarant works for a company subject to SEC regulation.
“Had Investment Banker Declarant declined to provide a statement, the SEC’s alternative was to compel his testimony to authenticate the documents at issue,” an extract from the reply read.
Investment Banker asserted that Ripple did not offer any other legal precedent to invalidate the declarant’s request aside from its “voluntary” argument.
According to Investment Banker’s further argument, the court has already acknowledged that preserving third parties’ privacy and security is adequate justification for withholding personal or identifying information from witnesses.
The statement explained that disclosing the declarant’s private details could put the witness in danger, particularly from others following the lawsuit. Furthermore, it said Ripple’s assertion of “voluntariness” would complicate further government investigations.
Investigators depend on the cooperation of individuals who might want to maintain their anonymity during and after the investigation. Investment Banker says that people might not be willing to assist investigators in subsequent cases if the court cannot protect the personal details of witnesses from the public.
“Here, the burden weighs strongly in favor of granting Investment Banker Declarant’s modest proposed redactions,” the counsel concluded.
Ripple’s Initial Refusal to the Request
The response from The Investment Banker comes a week after Ripple opposed a request made by an unnamed employee to exclude his name, position, and employer from the declaration submitted supporting the SEC’s move for summary judgment.
Ripple stated that the declarant lacked a strong justification for such a request, adding that the declaration was provided voluntarily rather than under duress.
