Fictional case 04 · Cryptocurrency fraud and organised crime investigations
The wallet cluster attributed to a software engineer
Germany, Singapore and South Africa
The allegation
Investors lose funds through a fraudulent trading platform. A software engineer who previously maintained part of its infrastructure is accused of controlling a cluster of cryptocurrency wallets. A tracing diagram connects a deposit address used by the engineer with addresses receiving investor funds. The diagram treats those connections as evidence of common ownership.
The independent investigation
Under counsel's instruction, 365 ALTERAM examines the transaction history, the tracing assumptions and lawfully disclosed exchange records. The attribution depends partly on treating addresses managed by a custodial exchange as if one customer controlled the entire cluster. Customer-level records separate the engineer's deposit from unrelated accounts. Repository history and deployment logs establish the engineer's access period, but do not establish control of the wallets. A later support message raises a separate question about what the engineer learned after leaving the project. That message is included in the report, with its timing and context.
The hearing and fictional outcome
The prosecution expert receives the underlying account reconciliation and revises the ownership conclusion. In this fictional case, the allegation that the engineer controlled the investor wallets is withdrawn. Questions about the later support message remain under investigation. The written decision withdrawing the wallet allegation identifies the failed attribution step, rather than declaring that every aspect of the engineer's conduct has been resolved.
The principle in practice
A transaction path can support a financial connection without identifying the person who controlled each address. Effective participation requires access to the assumptions that turned a diagram into an allegation of ownership.
Forensic deliverable
A transaction reconstruction, attribution analysis and timeline of technical access and knowledge.
What this illustration demonstrates
Independent examination must record what supports the allegation, what challenges it and what remains unresolved. 365 ALTERAM supports counsel with source-linked findings and specialist coordination; the competent authority determines the legal consequences.