Chastain argued the use of “insider trading” to describe his alleged actions is “inflammatory” and doesn’t have anything to do with the accusations he faces, adding a jury may be influenced by the term if his case is brought to trial.
He also added that “insider trading” only applies to securities and not to NFTs, a claim similarly made in August by his legal team, and the phrase was used to spark attention in the media to skew the jury’s view of him.
Prosecutors fired back, stating the phrase “accurately captures” the accusations made against him and the term isn’t “so inherently inflammatory” to warrant the “extreme measure” of having the term removed from his charges.
They also rebuked his claim of insider trading only applying to securities calling it a “legal error” and an “unduly cramped understanding of the phrase,” claiming it can be used to reference multiple types of fraud in which someone with non-public knowledge uses it to trade assets.
Source: Prosecutors argue “insider trading” claim in the OpenSea case is accurate
