Bitcoin Forum

“When I met with him, I told him I’m here to talk to you about Bitcoin. At the time there were two police officers there. In fact, I think that initially their intention was to just escort me away, but when I said ‘Bitcoin,’ one of them was interested and let me continue talking. And I said, ‘You know, people think you were the founder of Bitcoin.’ And I asked him a few questions about, whether or not it was true, and he said, ‘I cannot talk about that. I’m not connected with it anymore.’ The exact quote is in the story. And I reasserted, ‘We are talking about Bitcoin here, correct?’ And he said, ‘Yes,’ but he went on the say that he would not elaborate at all or answer questions. And, in addition, my last question to him was, ‘If you are in anyway not connected, you need to tell me now,’ and he said, ‘I cannot do that.’”

Source: http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2014/03/07/nakamoto-bitcoin-newsweek (http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2014/03/07/nakamoto-bitcoin-newsweek)

At first I did not believe Dorian S Nakamoto could be the true Satoshi, but I am beginning to find more plausability in the idea. I guess if anyone could find the two officers and either of them could verify Goodman's account of the story that may offer more concrete evidence beyond the very circumstantial proof that's been given thus far.

"And I reasserted, ‘We are talking about Bitcoin here, correct?’"

and he said: "what is bitcom?"

and i said: "you are satoshi right?"

and he said "yes, go away!"


makes sense.  :D

Typical journalist leading question. She mentions bitcoin a few times and then asks him if she is talking about bitcoin. What else is he going to say other than "yes"! ffs

Dorian may have been unfamiliar with the term "bitcoin" but assumed that the reporter was using it as a reference to some other classified work.

At least it is clear that one of them is lying about the conversation. Both of the accounts (his & hers) can't possibly be true.

Has happened though, criminals would confess to their crimes only later in court to deny everything.

Of course, I tend to not believe if the cops says one way or another. Without audio/video evidence its just a case of he said she said.

IMO, The way she got to his house makes me wonder the integrity of her work. She lied the whole up to... so she most likely lead with a series of questions to get an answer that she could mold into what she wanted.

Cops cant lead a suspect though like that can they?

IMO with the amount of evidence provided this would have been laughed out of court in a heartbeat.

my mother said my cousin said the friend of his friend told my uncle that my mother said

It makes no sense for Satoshi to be honest with her and then turn around to deny it, especially considering he had many days to prepare for such an encounter.

Once again I have to ask, we're to believe she conducted this interview without audio or video recording? If so, we're supposed to trust her recollection of the exact wording, and question order?  If she's not basing her reporting on personal recollections and in fact does have a recording (a/v, or audio), then where is it?

OMG, you guys are so crazy.. Its fucking him. He was confronted by one nice, cute looking blonde reporter and he spilled the beans. Then the whole world shows up on his door step and he said hes not the guy.  You cant actually believe that do you?

Andreas and Gavin are in the know.

I am in the know, and soon you guys will realize that Satoshi loves trains, lives in CA has a few kids and drives a corolla.

Don't leave me hanging, dude! Was there, or wasn't there a goat?

When you watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrrtA6IoR_E

It's abundantly clear Dorian is not the creator of bitcoin.

Especially the end, "Leah wrote this?" Dorian says before shaking his head in disbelief.

I like proof too, but the proof in the case is in the pudding. Do you think people would be offering charter jets, donations ect if this was not Satoshi. The heat would die down instantly and he would go back to real life. NO NEED TO SPEND TENS OF THOUSANDS ON A GUY WHO IS NOT SATOSHI. Hes Satoshi, Gavin knows it and so do I. He even spent bitcoins in a F2F transaction and that person remembers how he looked.

Its him, we'll all know soon enough once he has time to get some fiat together, get his family safe and have a much needed beer with Gavin.

Did you see those reporters in the video when he was being hounded?

"WHY DID YOU CREATE BITCOIN!? WHY DID YOU CREATE THE BITCOIN!!!"

They don't even ask *if* - they simply assume they are right.

In summary (these type of) journalists are a pack of animals on a hunt, and they'll take down the prey, with little care if they have the right person.

And there's no way she can back down now with such claimed accuracy to the story. She can only repeat her belief and hope enough people believe her such that she doesn't lose too much face.

This guy also appears to have far from perfect command of English, apparently may have had a stroke (i.e. brain confusion), so it's entirely plausible he might say anything to get this woman to leave him alone. And since he may actually have worked on classified stuff, if some random person starts asking about some technology he doesn't know about, it seems reasonable he might assume it was related to his government work.

So you're on the fence. You do think it may be him, am I correct?

In the article it says:

"I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it," he says, dismissing all further queries with a swat of his left hand. "It's been turned over to other people. They are in charge of it now. I no longer have any connection."

In the her explaination here there's no mention of the original quotes.

"I cannot talk about that. I’m not connected with it anymore."
And I reasserted, ‘We are talking about Bitcoin here, correct?’ And he said, ‘Yes,’
And, in addition, my last question to him was, ‘If you are in anyway not connected, you need to tell me now,’ and he said, ‘I cannot do that.’”

You're not really "making a decision" if you have more evidence than that. It's like taking a rock to thirty geologists who assert it is indeed a rock and then saying "I've made a decision; it's a rock." :D

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQxOqg82qXk2byaoZAyrXY6wK3k2NcjYzVMsMOI9_t0e9v7Ne4mhg

So you're not leaning in one direction or another?  Interesting.  Do you believe in karma?

I just pissed in my pants. HAHAHA  ;D

Well I believe in karma, I also believe in intuition and both have no physical evidence of being real yet they are very real to me.

I think you should consider that some things can be real in the absence of proof.  

In this case I think that absence of proof will no longer be absent soon enough, unlike karma or intuition which will most likely never be proven to exist.

Speaking of the importance of facts: have you been able to find evidence to support your cavirtex theory?

This.

Oh for fuck's sake. Even if Leah has Dorian on video saying "Yes, I did create bitcoin" it doesn't mean shit because he is saying the opposite now.

So basically, a guy says his wife said a guy who she saw once years ago looks like someone in a picture today.  You consider that conclusive?  Also, cross-racial identifications are notoriously unreliable.

Its still plausible.

Yes this....unless he is mentally off from his stroke, why would he admit to it to begin with?    He was either confused or the reporter is "exaggerating".  Her actions in general speak to what kind of person she is so making something up is not a big stretch at this point.

Bob, please fix your post: you have added your words as though they were mine.  

Your theory was that everyone at cavirtex uses a fake name and then later you admited that David Joseph (CEO) might be a real name (and then came up with another theory that he changed his name).  

So I think I've already proven my point: you don't know either way (and yes I know the customer service reps use aliases).

leah mcgrath goodman is a known liar.

she has been proven time and time before that she changes peoples quotes, twists people words and ruins peoples lives.

if you dont believe me. here is a facebook group dedicated to her lies:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/152252848262001/

lea has only her opinion and fading memory of dorians responses. yet other reporters have video. including the video where dorian thinks we are all involved in bitcom.. that is one hell of a slip of the tongue...

thats like a priest calling jesus, jason. somthing they have been involved in and dedicated to for years and they cant even get the name right.. the real bitcoin inventor wouldnt make that mistake.. but a innocent guy would

Its not letting me fix it.  until I see proof that Joseph is his real name I must assume I am correct. DID YOU NOT SEE WHERE THEY ADMIT TO USING FAKE NAMES  Peter? Even the "business development manager" uses a fake name.  ;D

Who cares if he changed his name or whatever. They have clients call into "call centers" where the reps, working from HOME talk about personal info, bank info, ect FROM HOME! Do you want to call your bank and talk to someone who works from home, who may or may not be smoking a joint with some of their friends.

Its a fucking joke.

I work a lot from home and may or may not be smoking a joint right now.  Does that make me a joke?

Leah has a new project. She is calling 867-5309 in every area code and asking every woman who answers if she is Jenny. Anyone who doesn't immediately say no gets doxxed.

My mother said my uncle is my aunt. True story!

Only if you lead me to believe that my personal info stored with your site is safe and secure. I have no problem with working from home. I just have a problem when I call into virtex and need to talk about my account with many thousands of dollars in it and I cant be sure who may be in the room hearing my call.

When I call Scotia bank (that's who I bank with) I know I'm calling someone in an office building somewhere. Most probably in a cubicle but I know for sure that the person I am talking to wont be having friends over who may be able to hear or see my info.

If you're ok with this then by all means you have a right to use the service, but don't try to fool others in here. Virtex is a dangerous place to trade based on the FACTS:  that they admit to using fake names, use a UPS store as their primary address, customer service reps work from home and create a very weak link.

If you would like to discuss this further please post on the virtex thread as I think we hijacked this thread long enough.

Good find :)

Dorian Nakamoto is either (a) who he says he is, and was recklessly misidentified by an overeager reporter; or (b) Kaiser Söze.

Classic

Alternatively it is possible he misheard he. She said Bitcoin and he heard _______ (the name of a project he worked on that was under NDA).  The guy is 68, had a stroke recently and English isn't his first language.  In the video he did make references to "BitCom" even after the reported said Bitcoin.

There are several telecommunications companies named bitcom. He probably though some work he did could have been associated that. He was just trying not to say anything that could breach any past disclosure agreements.

She should have found a Satoshi with Alzheimer's and gone for a full confession on record.

well his family meant to have not known anything about it, so hearing a reporter ask them of course they would reply, that he wont admit to it. coz its not him and they have never heard him mention the words before to his family. or they cold hav thought she was asking about a project he done with the government


he never said the words, 'i made bitcoin' he may have however thought she was talking about a government project which he was involved in to do with aviation or defense, most contractors are never given specifics like project names. they are just ordered to install equipment in certain places or do certain tasks. governments dont divulged all the details to a contractor normally only a chief or other high ranking personel know the government projects names. so when a reporter approaches you, you know its not about dropping litter or smoking in public, so you then think it must be related to those secret projects you done for the government and reply  ‘I cannot talk about that. I’m not connected with it anymore.’

well she initiated the questioning, so the topic was in her control. if i asked you, have you ever rode a elephant. and you gave a negative response. and i then said ‘We are talking about riding elephants here, correct?’ you would say yes.. its not like you were the one talking about .. pfft, i dunno.... ah, eating watermelons.. when she asked about elephants.. and then ofcourse you would then say you cant say anymore, as there is no more to say

Why the strange choice of phrasing?

"If you are in any way not connected, you need to tell me now" is a confusing way to phrase that statement and I doubt it was unintentional.  Apart from anything else, it's an aggressive statement.  He "needs" to tell her now or what?  Why leave the implied threat unexpressed unless you're intentionally being vague and hoping to confuse someone?

She was hoping to bully him into a "confession" and it didn't work so she needed to grasp at straws and get him to say something - anything - she could vaguely interpret as acknowledgement.

Months of investigations have lead that chick to the doorstep of Satoshi Nakamoto.
And she isn't even recording the convertation?
Not even with her iphone hidden in her pocket? Isn't that a little amateurish?

Another article said she was sitting on his front porch for an hour after he told her to go away.

What a fucking slob she is.   Sorry ...

-B-

The crime in this case being ....?

In California, secretly recording someone without their consent could be at least a misdemeanor offense and could also subject the recorder to civil liability.

I tend to agree. Either the creator of bitcoin is also a world class impromptu actor and amazing liar  or this is just a smart old many living his life in retirement with no idea what the heck bitcoin is.

And yes that reaction towards the reporter is very convenience, its a reaction of just complete shock.

I admire the girl for being passionate about getting "the story". Unmasking the creator of bitcoin is something a lot of people would be interested in learning about so I get she was excited about getting the big story.

But in hindsight, I think she used some poor ethics. She does a great job at asking people questions in a way that gets you answers you can use to tell a story, thats what she did with this guys family.  I guarantee this guys family said a lot of things but she asked specific questions to get cetain answers and then picks and chose those answers to fit her story/accusation.

I think this lady worked on this story for so long (2 months) that even if evidence started popping up that this guy knew nothing about bitcoin,  she just couldn't be honest with herself and let it go.  For that she is wrong ,  if that's the case.

Part of getting the story is getting the story right.  It is clear she went into this absolutely convinced she had the right person and then acted in a way to get confirmation of it.  Confirmation bias is a piss-poor way of getting to the truth.  Whether or not she got it right, and I am increasingly doubting that, it was done in an atrociously bad way.

But she is now cornered because the only proof she has is her word about an alleged conversation.
I would have risked a minor offense to provide proof for such a big story.

And i 'm not nearly as ruthless as that girl appears to be.

Maybe that's better than having a recorded conversation that would have shown she is completely FOS.  We don't know.

Some ppl dont even have a clue regarding audio recording law. If you're part of the conversation (which she was), you dont need to have a consent to record the conversation.

Yet many ppl was naive and feared when they are told...."violating privacy".

 :D

Satoshi is a master of everything and anything!
He's definitely a karate master as well.

I'm pretty damn sure she recorded it. And the truth would only hurts her story, hence she destroyed it.

Its common knowledge that all investigating journalists audio record their conversations or interviews.

The sheriff's deputies are already corroborating her story. What a difference would a recording make? Dorian could always claim that he mistook Bitcoin for a secret government project (and that is in fact what he is claiming).

Link or stfu

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-la-sheriffs-say-satoshi-nakamoto-man-did-talk-about-bitcoin-to-newsweek-reporter-20140307,0,609860.story

Thats not confirming her story. Its about the quote in the story being correct. Which does not mean Dorian was talking about bitcoin as Leah claimed.

Keep pumping your scamcoin dumbass if you cant even spread FUD right.

So you are basically claiming that the Sheriff's office is intentionally misleading the public here? I am pretty sure that the Sheriff's deputies were fully aware whether Dorian understood Bitcoin being discussed or not, otherwise they would not have made the statement.

You have reading comprehensive skill? read the fcking link again .

You have understanding comprehensive skill? If I say that the Sheriff's deputies corroborate her story what else could it mean besides that the Sheriff's deputies corroborate the quotes? And as said, a recording would not make any difference, as if somebody is not willing to believe the Sheriff's deputies they would not believe a recording either.

A big flaw in your logic, hence you dont understand crap about legitimacy of the story.

Seems to me there is no fucking way this guy is Satoshi.

His English is poor, as proven by his online presence om Amazon, on train websites etc. Satoshi's English is impeccable. Or maybe he spent years online faking bad English so if a reporters turned up on his doorstep and people looked into his history they would think he wasn't Satosho...... Ever heard of occams razor?.


He refers to Bitcom, he says 'I've never worked with that company, i don't know anything about them'.

With regard to Leah's confrontation.

He has worked with classified projects with the government, he was clearly scared, that's why he called the police, she asked him about it, he assumed she was talking about one of the classified projects he worked on, he said he can't talk about it.

Those people apparently include you among their ranks.  That only applies in what are called "one party consent" states.  California law requires consent from all parties.  More than one person has done time for their ignorance of the law.

His poor "amazon english" vs his perfect "bitcointalk english" is a poor argument imo.

My english are poor when it comes to speaking and posting casually in a forum, but if i had to
write a paper and add credibility to a project of mine through the use of proper english, i would have been
double checking and proofreading my texts.

I don't think that anyone ever communicated with Satoshi in real time.

i do not think that dorian is satoshi- or he is really keyser soze.

but one thing from his perspective does not add up for me: how likely do you think is it that your name is dorian satoshi nakamoto and you never heard of bitcoin? as a tech savvy educated/academic person? do you reallly think she is the first person who confronted him with bitcoin?

Loads of IRC chats.

The thing is, his poor English on the train forums, Amazon etc is not just lazy. It's a basic lack of comprehension of the rules.

So he was doing a contract for FAA, if he has never heard about "Bitcoin", he might mistook the pronunciation for "Boeing".

You all realize that the credibility of Leah McGrath Goodman is 0% ?

Currently she's pointing to someone unknown claiming that the police officers could back up the story...


According to this link, one of the officers 'vaguely' knew about bitcoin. And knowing the average intelligence of a police officer in the US, and how often they 'cannot' recall events, or 'do not remember' events, I would not trust them or McGrath at all.

To give any credibility to the story, why's there no audio recording or video recording to back everything up. An investigative journalist for a tabloid magazine that thinks we should take her words at face value?

Even worse than the shitty journalism is the fact that she doesn't seem to back off on anything. What about just admitting to the fact that she fucked up? It's unlikely that she did find Satoshi, but in the event that she did, it did not justify outing him like this, printing a picture of his car with a license plate that was not blurred, a picture of the house, and the location(?). She tried to put the blame on the magazine for these errors, but hell, if you're a good journalist, you demand to see everything that's in the article BEFORE it hits the presses.

Is she a Christian? If she is, somebody please tell her she's going straight to hell. That woman is seriously mentally deranged.