3AC Co-Founder Alleges Liquidators Have ‘Baited’ the Firm
The same liquidators have been granted approval to issue subpoenas.
After nearly a month of media silence, Three Arrows Capital (3AC) Co-founder Zhu Su resurfaced with a tweet in which he accused liquidators of baiting the firm. Earlier this week it was rumored that he and other executives might be fleeing as a result of the firm’s $675 million USD implosion, which has sent ripples through the crypto space.
Sadly, our good faith to cooperate with the Liquidators was met with baiting. Hope that they did exercise good faith wrt the StarkWare token warrants. pic.twitter.com/CF73xI8r6n
— Zhu Su ? (@zhusu) July 12, 2022
In the tweet, Su shared emails from the firm’s legal counsel that were sent to the legal representatives of 3AC’s liquidators. The emails accused the liquidators of baiting, stating that “contrary to your representations that you were seeking to engage our clients in good faith, and constructively, you had already prepared that application, and were in fact baiting our clients.”
The email alleged that Singapore solicitors were interested in learning whether some of 3ac’s pertinent discussions were held on a “without prejudice basis,” and that the questioning was so that the solicitors might use the discussions in court filings against 3AC without notification.
Su’s tweet comes nearly a month after what was considered to be the peak of 3AC’s implosion. Since then the firm has been ordered to liquidate its assets, and most recently its existing assets in United States jurisdiction have been frozen by New York State Judge Martin Glenn.
According to documents filed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, lawyers representing 3AC’s liquidators said that the co-founders were not cooperating and that their whereabouts remain unknown — which has caused a massive amount of speculation in the crypto community.
Whether or not it is related to their locations being unknown, one of 3AC’s legal counselors, Christopher Daniel, has alleged that the co-founders have faced threats of physical violence and several requests for questioning from Singapore’s Monetary Authorities.