Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto - Evidence Here

[Vinalians]

I don't really think he is the Satoshi Nakamoto, There are so many experts saying that. For sure they made their own research just to prove that Craig is not satoshi right. Even McAfee didn't say that Craig is satoshi. A lot of humor but still he can't use Satoshi first account here and move bitcoin from his wallet. If he manages to do that for sure almost all of the people in the crypto world will believe him.

[1714753741]

1714753741

[1714753741]

1714753741

[1714753741]

1714753741

[1714753741]

1714753741

[1714753741]

1714753741

[vladimirhf]

Tomorrow, on Bloomberg, Dr. Craig Steven Wright on "60 Minutes".

So, how did this episode turn out? Did it have the worldwide transformative effecting the slobbering BSV fanatics thought that it would? I must have missed it. Oh, that's right, everybody missed it, because it didn't happen.

Much like how CSW being Satoshi never happened.

The media just love this kind of controversy. If people hate him, even better, more attention they will receive. So here we are talking about bloomberg

[deebawriter]

The case is becoming interesting.. Court ordered him to pay 5 billion dollars.. I read it today.. I'm confused, so did he ever actually have alot of bitcoins? does he currently even have one? did he claim to be satoshi just for attention and then got stuck having to pay money back he's never had? You can read more at

https://btcmanager.com/craig-wright-5-billion-bitcoin-fifty-percent-intellectual-property/?q=/craig-wright-5-billion-bitcoin-fifty-percent-intellectual-property/&q=/craig-wright-5-billion-bitcoin-fifty-percent-intellectual-property/&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=socialpush&utm_campaign=SNAP

[don_ricci]

Check this out, from article posted 4 days ago:

It is incredibly ironic that people think Bitcoin is in any way about anonymity. I wouldn’t stop people trying to hide behind TOR, but such is not the purpose of Bitcoin. Bitcoin was birthed using a credit card payment. The records of the same payment are required to be kept by the banking system for 25 years. It hasn’t been that long. More importantly, I claimed the expenses on my tax in the 2008/2009 tax year. You see, a domain purchase in August 2008 is within the Australian tax year, but I was audited, which ended up going to court.
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*V3xLxeU37jnh5xbuvM5xsA.png
What you don’t realise yet is that I used my credit card. Yes, as crazy as it might seem to you, I used my credit card to purchase anonymous services. I even claimed it on my tax. I had an argument with the tax office in Australia about claiming it.

I told you to be careful in what you wanted and what you wished for, because you’re going to get it. I am the person behind the moniker Satoshi Nakamoto, and as a result of all the trolls and haters, I’m going to provide evidence. Not in a way that anonymous cowards would do. I’m going to use courts and law.

Welcome to law.

In my opinion, in the near future he is going with this and other evidence to some US court and proves behind any doubt that he is indeed Satoshi Nakamoto.

Unleash the kraken, I want to see some real flame and despair in this thread!

https://medium.com/@craig_10243/evidence-and-law-f8f10001efa5

I respect your aspirations to find someone who really is Satoshi Nakamoto. But my question is: why? Is this going to lead to something? It seems to me that it doesn’t matter who it is, Craig Wright or someone else, because it will not affect anything.

[raidarksword]

This Satoshi Nakamoto claiming never stops to be honest and i don't care for craig wright. Real Nakamoto never reveal himself in the public eye because of what he had done to bitcoin's success and for sure with bitcoin he has in his wallet he wants stay anonymous for life.

[sisterchristian]

hal finney was part of team satoshi

[fiulpro]

Check this out, from article posted 4 days ago:

It is incredibly ironic that people think Bitcoin is in any way about anonymity. I wouldn’t stop people trying to hide behind TOR, but such is not the purpose of Bitcoin. Bitcoin was birthed using a credit card payment. The records of the same payment are required to be kept by the banking system for 25 years. It hasn’t been that long. More importantly, I claimed the expenses on my tax in the 2008/2009 tax year. You see, a domain purchase in August 2008 is within the Australian tax year, but I was audited, which ended up going to court.

What you don’t realise yet is that I used my credit card. Yes, as crazy as it might seem to you, I used my credit card to purchase anonymous services. I even claimed it on my tax. I had an argument with the tax office in Australia about claiming it.

I told you to be careful in what you wanted and what you wished for, because you’re going to get it. I am the person behind the moniker Satoshi Nakamoto, and as a result of all the trolls and haters, I’m going to provide evidence. Not in a way that anonymous cowards would do. I’m going to use courts and law.

Welcome to law.

In my opinion, in the near future he is going with this and other evidence to some US court and proves behind any doubt that he is indeed Satoshi Nakamoto.

Unleash the kraken, I want to see some real flame and despair in this thread!

https://medium.com/@craig_10243/evidence-and-law-f8f10001efa5

I think this is the only news you are familiar with.
You should understand that the court gave him full power plus freedom to actually go and prove that he is Satoshi .
Unfortunately since he wasn't , he wasn't even able to prove anything also at the same time I think we all know how he stole coins from a person after he died .
This is so low.
I don't think I agree with you on this , this is a stupid news that am sure he paid to spread it so that he gets more people to stand up for him.

[NeuroticFish]

In my opinion, in the near future he is going with this and other evidence to some US court and proves behind any doubt that he is indeed Satoshi Nakamoto.

So if I can prove that I've bought a domain name for you, it means that I am you?
I guess that even CSW knows that US Court judges are not so stupid.

I don't know why all this trolling continues on and on really. It is clear that the only proof we'd accept is the cryptographic proof and this clown is unable to provide it.

[wildinblue]

I don't understand why are you still wasting your time with this scammer?it was so obvious from day one that he has nothing to do with satoshi and even if you were dumb enough back then to believe that he is the creator of Bitcoin there is so much evidence since then that proves this is a big lie.
Enough is enough with this idiot,Bitcoin community should move on and ignore him and his supporters.

[slaman29]

The strangest thing out of this whole mess is: 1. Court says Craig Wright perjured. That means he lied. He submitted false documents. He faked shit. And then, against every bit of common sense I have as a normal human being, 2. People say the lies prove he is Satoshi.

How does logic work in crypto anyway?

[SirLancelot]

This Satoshi Nakamoto claiming never stops to be honest and i don't care for craig wright. Real Nakamoto never reveal himself in the public eye because of what he had done to bitcoin's success and for sure with bitcoin he has in his wallet he wants stay anonymous for life.

What does he need the public to know him for/ even if they want to praise him and donate money for him, it still cannot be up to that whooping sum of 980,000 bitcoin that he has in his wallet, and seeing that alone is what keeps him company. If Craig claim to be satoshi, why has he not then proved that to the world by taking just 1 bitcoin out of the coin and donating it to the charity organization, but he can’t do that and yet he wants to be satoshi.

I think that the court has really even declared the judgment against him and he is now officially declared to be a scammer and this will hunt him for the rest of his life because no friend and family would want to do any business with him thinking that he will defraud them also. I think that we should close the chapter of this guy now because he is a forgotten fellow already.

[Vishnu.Reang]

The strangest thing out of this whole mess is: 1. Court says Craig Wright perjured. That means he lied. He submitted false documents. He faked shit. And then, against every bit of common sense I have as a normal human being, 2. People say the lies prove he is Satoshi.

How does logic work in crypto anyway?

Only a small fraction of the cryptocurrency users are having a great deal of knowledge about the Blockchain technology and Bitcoin. So it is not difficult to brainwash the remaining users with propaganda. Craig Wright and his goons have created enough confusion in the minds of ordinary cryptocurrency users, to sway at least 5-10% of them to believe that he is the real Satoshi.

[ðºÞæ]

2 Billion of tax payments for Ira, thats a lot of BTC to sell
https://modernconsensus.com/cryptocurrencies/bitcoin/exclusive-interview-with-craig-wright-just-after-ordered-to-pay-5-billion-in-bitcoin/

That Judge was Epsteins attorney for 7 years and in 2015 defended him on TV as "legal expert and former US. prosecutor" and not as his attorney.
That is very deceptive, not what you would expect form a Judge.
https://modernconsensus.com/cryptocurrencies/bitcoin/judge-in-craig-wright-lawsuit-once-quit-as-us-attorney-to-work-for-jefferey-epstein/

[nutildah]

2 Billion of tax payments for Ira, thats a lot of BTC to sell
https://modernconsensus.com/cryptocurrencies/bitcoin/exclusive-interview-with-craig-wright-just-after-ordered-to-pay-5-billion-in-bitcoin/

Why do you keep rehashing this nonsense? According to the in-court version of your friend Craig, he can't access the bitcoin, so he can't give it to the Kleiman estate. He can't access the bitcoin because as the judge said, the Tulip Trust never existed. Craig has no coins, ergo Kleiman has no coins. Craig is still on the hook for $5 billion though.

That Judge was Epsteins attorney for 7 years and in 2015 defended him on TV as "legal expert and former US. prosecutor" and not as his attorney.
That is very deceptive, not what you would expect form a Judge.
https://modernconsensus.com/cryptocurrencies/bitcoin/judge-in-craig-wright-lawsuit-once-quit-as-us-attorney-to-work-for-jefferey-epstein/

I asked you this question in the BSV thread after you posted the same thing there, and you completely ignored it:

And this negates the ruling against Wright in what way?

Care to answer it now?

[ðºÞæ]

2 Billion of tax payments for Ira, thats a lot of BTC to sell
https://modernconsensus.com/cryptocurrencies/bitcoin/exclusive-interview-with-craig-wright-just-after-ordered-to-pay-5-billion-in-bitcoin/

Why do you keep rehashing this nonsense? According to the in-court version of your friend Craig, he can't access the bitcoin, so he can't give it to the Kleiman estate. He can't access the bitcoin because as the judge said, the Tulip Trust never existed. Craig has no coins, ergo Kleiman has no coins. Craig is still on the hook for $5 billion though.

That Judge was Epsteins attorney for 7 years and in 2015 defended him on TV as "legal expert and former US. prosecutor" and not as his attorney.
That is very deceptive, not what you would expect form a Judge.
https://modernconsensus.com/cryptocurrencies/bitcoin/judge-in-craig-wright-lawsuit-once-quit-as-us-attorney-to-work-for-jefferey-epstein/

I asked you this question in the BSV thread after you posted the same thing there, and you completely ignored it:

And this negates the ruling against Wright in what way?

Care to answer it now?
What ruling, there is no ruling. The only thing certain Craig Wright has to pay some legal fees.


in more detail here in the miami herald
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article232595847.html

[nutildah]

What ruling, there is no ruling. The only thing certain Craig Wright has to pay some legal fees.

Let me dictionary that for you:

ruling noun
rul·​ing | \ ˈrü-liŋ  \
Definition of ruling (Entry 1 of 2)
: an official or authoritative decision, decree, statement, or interpretation (as by a judge on a point of law)

A court order (which this was) is a specific type of ruling.

In addition to having to pay for the plaintiff's legal expenses, the judge RULED that:

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(i), the Court deems the following facts to be
established for purposes of this action: (1) Dr. Wright and David Kleiman entered into
a 50/50 partnership to develop Bitcoin intellectual property and to mine bitcoin; (2) any
Bitcoin-related intellectual property developed by Dr. Wright prior to David Kleiman’s
death was property of the partnership, (3) all bitcoin mined by Dr. Wright prior to David
Kleiman’s death (“the partnership’s bitcoin”) was property of the partnership when
mined; and (4) Plaintiffs presently retain an ownership interest in the partnership’s
bitcoin, and any assets traceable to them.

More words from the judge:

I now turn to the question of a proper remedy. Plaintiffs’ Motion asked the Court to declare
that “the 1,100,111 bitcoin referenced to in to [sic] the Tulip Trust document is joint property
belonging equally to both Dave Kleiman and Craig Wright.” DE 210 at 6. On August 26, at oral
argument on the Motion, Plaintiffs asked the Court to strike Dr. Wright’s pleadings. Rule 37
specifically recognizes that an appropriate discovery sanction is for the Court to deem certain facts
established for purposes of this action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(a)(i). Rule 37 also permits a Court
to strike pleadings. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(iii)...

There is clear and convincing evidence that Dr. Wright’s non-compliance with the Court’s
Orders is willful and in bad faith, that Plaintiffs have been prejudiced, and (particularly given the
extended pattern of non-compliance and its egregiousness) a lesser sanction is not adequate to
punish or to ensure future compliance with the Court’s Orders. Therefore, sanctions under Rule
37(b) are warranted.

What this basically means is that the judge nuked Craig's whole defense because he was full of shit. Therefore, the plaintiff wins.

A federal judge ruled this in a federal court.

in more detail here in the miami herald
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article232595847.html

I ask you again: what does this have to do with anything?

How does it negate the judge's findings that Craig is a fraud? And by the way, the judge did call Craig "fraudulent." Look it up for yourself:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.277.0.pdf

[ðºÞæ]

In future you will have your work cut out sticking up for that child rape supporting judge. In legal circles its just about unheard of for a judge to retire to join the accused legal team taking with him his inside knowledge of the case. Average Joe does not take kind to this they have kids at home, just saying.

A recommendation is not a ruling.
https://youtu.be/fIbMQl895hQ
the article
https://coingeek.com/bitstocks-tv-analyzes-the-kleiman-v-wright-case-bad-news-for-btc/


Whats progress has been made with the critical vulnerabilities found in Lightning Network software where users will lose funds.

[nutildah]

A recommendation is not a ruling.

It is, especially in this case.

lawprose.org/lawprose-lesson-165-ruling-vs-opinion-vs-judgment-etc/

A ruling is the outcome of a court’s decision, whether on some particular point of law (such as the admissibility of evidence) or on the case as a whole. A ruling may lead to an order–a court’s written direction or determination, which may be either interlocutory (on an intermediate matter), or more broadly, final (and therefore dispositive of the entire case).

Even your pedo friend Calvin Ayre said it was a "ruling," even if he of course misinterpreted it for his own financial gain, because that's what he does best.

https://coingeek.com/bitstocks-tv-analyzes-the-kleiman-v-wright-case-bad-news-for-btc/

Coingeek completely abandoned any aspirations to be a reputable news source when they said the USPTO declared Wright was Satoshi. This was utterly false and they lost any remaining respect they might have had among freethinking people at that point.

Whats progress has been made with the critical vulnerabilities found in Lightning Network software where users will lose funds.

Your nonsensical FUD is completely off-topic.

Next.

[BorisTheBulletDodger]

In future you will have your work cut out sticking up for that child rape supporting judge. In legal circles its just about unheard of for a judge to retire to join the accused legal team taking with him his inside knowledge of the case. Average Joe does not take kind to this they have kids at home, just saying.

Maybe you should ask Calvin why he likes to hang out with girls who are still wearing braces then if you're so concerned about kids...






https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/wsop-school-girls-calvin-ayre.37705/




 

[Iamtutut]

In future you will have your work cut out sticking up for that child rape supporting judge. In legal circles its just about unheard of for a judge to retire to join the accused legal team taking with him his inside knowledge of the case. Average Joe does not take kind to this they have kids at home, just saying.

A recommendation is not a ruling.
https://youtu.be/fIbMQl895hQ
the article
https://coingeek.com/bitstocks-tv-analyzes-the-kleiman-v-wright-case-bad-news-for-btc/


Whats progress has been made with the critical vulnerabilities found in Lightning Network software where users will lose funds.

I have to quote myself again...

If some of the little baby trolls herein would have some balls, they could come up with their pricky faces
And try to talk their "facts" in same manner as these decent ppl are capable of.

So show us ur counter facts (lol) pls

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/cx0vmh/kleiman_vs_craig_wright_getting_the_facts/

Usual lies from a BSV shill.

The Court ordered Wright to reveal his holdings, he refused to. Civil contempt of Court, Judge decides to use article 37B for proceeding.

Kleiman Estate Entitled to 500K coins of any Bitcoin fork, includes BCH and BSV.

Judge did not recommend, it is an ORDER
-> "WHEREFORE, it is ordered that:1.The Motion to Compel [DE 210] is GRANTED..."
-> "Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(i), the Court deems the following facts to be established for purposes of this action:"
-> "DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers this 27thday of August, 2019, at West Palm Beach in the Southern District of Florida."


BSV shills can't read.

For the lazy ones