Kevin O'Leary Secures $2.8 Million Judgment Against Crypto Influencer Ben Armstrong
Washington, Saturday, 14 February 2026.
A federal court awarded O’Leary $2.8 million, including $2 million in punitive damages, after influencer Ben Armstrong maliciously falsely accused the venture capitalist of involvement in a murder.
The Price of Malice
In a ruling delivered this week, Judge Beth Bloom of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida finalized the damages against Armstrong, underscoring the severity of his conduct [1][3]. The court’s financial award is comprised of three distinct categories: $750,000 for emotional distress, approximately $78,000 for reputational harm, and a substantial $2 million in punitive damages [1][2][3]. This punitive component, which constitutes the bulk of the judgment, specifically addresses the court’s finding of “actual malice” in Armstrong’s actions, punishing a pattern of hostile communications that extended beyond mere negligence [2].
A Campaign of Harassment
The legal battle stems from a series of social media posts made by Armstrong in March 2025, which targeted O’Leary with serious, unfounded criminal accusations [1][2]. Armstrong, formerly operating under the moniker “BitBoy Crypto,” falsely accused the Shark Tank star of murder and paying millions to cover up his role in a tragic 2019 boating accident [1][3]. While O’Leary was a passenger in the incident and his wife was fully exonerated following a trial, Armstrong’s posts urged his followers to “call a real life murderer” and publicly doxxed O’Leary by releasing his private cell phone number [3]. These posts garnered roughly 156,000 views, forcing O’Leary to increase his annual security spending by an estimated $200,000 to manage the resulting influx of threats and harassment [2].
Default Judgment and Failed Defenses
Armstrong’s failure to engage with the judicial process played a decisive role in the outcome. After being served with the complaint on March 28, 2025, he failed to respond, leading to a default judgment on May 6, 2025 [1]. It was not until January 9, 2026—nearly a year later—that Armstrong attempted to set aside the judgment, citing severe mental health struggles [1]. His defense team presented diagnoses including bipolar disorder and Cotard’s syndrome, a delusion where the sufferer believes they are dead [1][2]. However, the court found that Armstrong had actual notice of the lawsuit and that illness alone was insufficient to vacate the judgment under federal rules [1][2].
Analytical Takeaway
Judge Bloom ultimately ruled that overturning the default judgment would unfairly prejudice O’Leary, who had already prepared expert reports and attended a full evidentiary hearing in October 2025 [1][2]. This verdict serves as a critical precedent for the digital economy, establishing that influencers cannot use online anonymity or personal instability to evade liability for defamation. For O’Leary, the judgment closes a painful chapter that reopened old wounds regarding the 2019 accident, validating his claims against a digital campaign that sought to destroy his reputation [3].