QuadrigaCX Users Suggest Founder’s Wife is Lying About Access

The QuadrigaCX mystery knows no bounds, with another instalment of the saga emerging over the weekend, as long-term users claimed that in the past they had received funds into their bank accounts from a company directly associated with the founder’s wife, Jennifer Robertson. Robertson has stated in an affidavit that she had nothing to do with the exchange’s business and has no access to funds, which could be undermined by the use of a business in her name as a method of getting exchange funds to users.

Users Receive Funds from Robertson Nova

The claims about user funds coming directly from Robertson herself stem from a report in The Chronicle Herald, a newspaper covering Nova Scotia, where Cotten and Robertson lived. The report cites QuadrigaCX users who say that in the past they have had withdrawals from the exchange come into their accounts from a company called Robertson Nova. This, say these users, is evidence that Robertson was directly involved in the exchange’s operations and had access to the funds, which would contradict her court testimony. This is a nice theory for the conspiracy theorists, but it has some holes.

Does Robertson Know More Than She Is Letting On?

According to Nova Scotia’s Registry of Joint Stock Companies, Robertson Nova Property Management Inc. exists as an entity of which Robertson is director, president, and recognized agent. Is this the smoking gun, proving Robertson lied in her court testimony and was involved in the exchange? No, not exactly. Just because a company is in someone’s name, it doesn’t mean they are actively involved. It just as likely that Cotten established the company in his wife’s name for tax reasons or to have a backup bank account after he ran into trouble with his own banks, as had happened in the past.
Even if Robertson was actively running the company to buy and sell property as is its stated purpose, Cotten may still have used her account temporarily for the same reason. Either way, this does not constitute proof that Robertson knew anything about the exchange’s business dealings, and unless evidence emerges that Robertson herself issued the payments then the theory holds no water. The reality is that those looking to make more out of this story than is already there will have to look elsewhere.

Comments (No)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.