Jury’s Emotional Breakdown Ends Trial
The tension inside the Manhattan courtroom reached a breaking point by the third day of deliberations. Jurors sent several detailed notes to Judge Clarke, many grappling with questions about the definition of “fraudulent intent” under wire fraud law.
By 3 p.m. Friday, they signaled their impasse: “We don’t believe we can come to a unanimous verdict.”
Three hours later, in a final note signed by every juror, they confirmed they were no closer to agreement. The letter described an intense emotional toll — half the panel broke down in tears, and several jurors admitted to sleepless nights wrestling with the case. Judge Clarke then called an end to the high-profile trial.
A Coded Operation Named “Omakase”
Prosecutors allege the Peraire-Bueno brothers masterminded a secret operation they called “Omakase”, a nod to precision and timing akin to a chef’s curated meal. According to the indictment, the pair used their MIT-honed technical skills to execute a $25 million crypto heist targeting “sandwich traders” — crypto players who profit by front-running and back-running other traders’ transactions.
These so-called “sandwich attacks” use bots to manipulate token prices: buying in just before another trader’s transaction to raise the price, then selling immediately after to pocket the difference. The Peraire-Buenos allegedly turned this tactic on its head, setting up a sophisticated counterattack that drained their rivals’ wallets in seconds.
Prosecutors claim the brothers’ actions were calculated theft disguised as market savvy, while the defense insists they played within the gray lines of an unregulated system—exploiting vulnerabilities, not breaking laws.
