A federal court in the United States has issued a landmark ruling in a high-profile defamation case, ordering crypto influencer Ben “Bitboy Crypto” Armstrong to pay $2.828 million in damages to Kevin O’Leary, the star of ABC’s “Shark Tank.” The court also denied Armstrong’s request to set aside the default judgment, finding that his claims of “extraordinary circumstances” did not meet the legal threshold.
Background: False Murder Allegations Stem from 2019 Boating Accident
The defamation case stems from false accusations Armstrong made against O’Leary in March 2025. Armstrong publicly called O’Leary a “murderer” and alleged that he “paid millions to cover up his role in a murder.” These claims were linked to a tragic boating accident in 2019 involving O’Leary’s wife, Linda, which resulted in two fatalities. Linda was later exonerated, but the incident caused significant financial fallout for the O’Learys, including the loss of speaking engagements.
Armstrong not only revived these baseless allegations but also shared O’Leary’s personal cell phone number, urging his followers to harass the businessman. According to court documents, O’Leary testified that the false posts severely damaged his business relationships and reputation with television network partners. He now spends an additional $200,000 annually on security, and his security team has urged him to implement even stricter measures.
Court Rejects Armstrong’s Bid to Vacate Default Judgment
On January 9, 2026, Armstrong filed a motion arguing that his incarceration and bipolar disorder constituted “extraordinary circumstances” that prevented him from responding to the lawsuit in time. However, the court’s omnibus order dated February 11 flatly rejected this argument, stating: “While the Defendant cites various mental health issues as the basis for his failure to respond, he has failed to provide specific facts and circumstances demonstrating why the illness or disability caused him to miss the original deadline.”
The ruling underscores that Armstrong’s excuses were insufficient to overturn the default judgment, leaving the multimillion-dollar award firmly in O’Leary’s favor. The decision sends a clear message about the legal consequences of online defamation, especially when targeting high-profile individuals.
Industry Impact: Legal Red Lines for Crypto Influencers
The case has sparked widespread discussion within the cryptocurrency community. As one of the most prominent crypto influencers, Armstrong’s defeat signals that courts are taking digital-age defamation seriously. O’Leary’s legal team emphasized that freedom of speech does not give anyone the right to spread malicious falsehoods. Armstrong has not yet issued a public statement, but his legal team may consider an appeal.
This is not Armstrong’s first brush with the law; he was previously arrested during a live stream over a stolen Lamborghini incident. The defamation verdict further highlights the lack of legal boundaries among some crypto influencers. Industry observers believe this judgment will prompt Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) to exercise greater caution when publishing content, especially regarding personal attacks or unverified serious allegations.
O’Leary has not disclosed specific plans for the damages but has indicated that a portion will be donated to cybersecurity education initiatives aimed at combating the spread of online misinformation. The case also sets a significant legal precedent for similar defamation lawsuits in the future.