SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper

[nutildah]

The court recently released the January deposition with Lynn Wright, Craig's first wife.

It's pretty dry, but there are some interesting parts. Probably the most interesting is that Craig told her he kept "some" bitcoin on MtGOX, which she believes was all of his bitcoin, based on the way he acted about GOX going under.

A: Well, he intimated that he had lost a lot of bitcoin when that Japanese company - when that guy in Japan, I think the - the bitcoin - I don't know if it was a bank or what sort of outfit it was, but he, I guess, absconded with all the money, and Craig had kept some of his - had - well, "some of it", I think he kept all of his bitcoin there...

Q. And what's your basis for your understanding that he kept a lot of his bitcoin there?

A. Because he said he lost a fair - lost a fair bit of money.

Seems a bit odd to me that Satoshi would keep his coins on MtGOX, whether it be "all" or just "some" of them. And that he would refer to whatever he had there as "a fair bit of money" (I read somewhere it was 50 BTC -- I know the data is out there but I don't have it in front of me).

Other takeaways:

- Neither Craig or Dave Kleiman once mentioned bitcoin in front of her while Dave was still alive
- In 2013, Craig asked her to write a paper explaining bitcoin to the Australian Tax Office
- In April 2015, Craig wanted her to attest to a statement saying she had known Craig and Dave had been working on bitcoin since 2009. Here was response:



She was questioned by the plaintiffs about it:

Q: And it says at the bottom: I do remember you working privately on Bitcoin and such well before 2009. Do you know what that statement is in reference to?

A. No.

Q. Okay. So you don't know what you were talking about in this email with Craig?

A. I don't remember it.

Q. And does the email refresh your recollection at all?

A. No... No, it confuses me more.

Q. Do you believe this email is forged?

MS MARKOE: Objection.

THE DEPONENT: I wouldn't - I don't know. I wouldn't - I wouldn't think it is, but I can't - I - I don't understand the time frame.

You can see all of her other email correspondence as evidence at the bottom of the court docket... This is the only one where words were typed below her signature... Hmm...

[hv_]

The court recently released the January deposition with Lynn Wright, Craig's first wife.

It's pretty dry, but there are some interesting parts. Probably the most interesting is that Craig told her he kept "some" bitcoin on MtGOX, which she believes was all of his bitcoin, based on the way he acted about GOX going under.

A: Well, he intimated that he had lost a lot of bitcoin when that Japanese company - when that guy in Japan, I think the - the bitcoin - I don't know if it was a bank or what sort of outfit it was, but he, I guess, absconded with all the money, and Craig had kept some of his - had - well, "some of it", I think he kept all of his bitcoin there...

Q. And what's your basis for your understanding that he kept a lot of his bitcoin there?

A. Because he said he lost a fair - lost a fair bit of money.

Seems a bit odd to me that Satoshi would keep his coins on MtGOX, whether it be "all" or just "some" of them. And that he would refer to whatever he had there as "a fair bit of money" (I read somewhere it was 50 BTC -- I know the data is out there but I don't have it in front of me).

Other takeaways:

- Neither Craig or Dave Kleiman once mentioned bitcoin in front of her while Dave was still alive
- In 2013, Craig asked her to write a paper explaining bitcoin to the Australian Tax Office
- In April 2015, Craig wanted her to attest to a statement saying she had known Craig and Dave had been working on bitcoin since 2009. Here was response:



She was questioned by the plaintiffs about it:

Q: And it says at the bottom: I do remember you working privately on Bitcoin and such well before 2009. Do you know what that statement is in reference to?

A. No.

Q. Okay. So you don't know what you were talking about in this email with Craig?

A. I don't remember it.

Q. And does the email refresh your recollection at all?

A. No... No, it confuses me more.

Q. Do you believe this email is forged?

MS MARKOE: Objection.

THE DEPONENT: I wouldn't - I don't know. I wouldn't - I wouldn't think it is, but I can't - I - I don't understand the time frame.

You can see all of her other email correspondence as evidence at the bottom of the court docket... This is the only one where words were typed below her signature... Hmm...

There d be much more u could 'report' but that d hurt all bags?

The case is getting turned, and scammers debunked on a side where u wanna be aligned with?

Mmm. We are all anonymous trolls, except Satoshi

 

[gentlemand]

From Andreas Antonopolous's chiming in - https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.500.5.pdf



Coins have been spent from 'Tulip Trust' addresses. That bonded courier sure is a slippery customer.

By this point I'd be delighted to see any evidence from a Craigy fan about any aspect of any claim he makes. There is none anywhere. Am genuinely starting to root for you guys. There's got to be something out there. Any crumb will do.

[vapourminer]

From Andreas Antonopolous's chiming in - https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.500.5.pdf



Coins have been spent from 'Tulip Trust' addresses. That bonded courier sure is a slippery customer.

By this point I'd be delighted to see any evidence from a Craigy fan about any aspect of any claim he makes. There is none anywhere. Am genuinely starting to root for you guys. There's got to be something out there. Any crumb will do.

yeah we need may need to send someone to help the other side or this will get very boring fast.

arguing with half wits takes work when all their (mostly defective) ammo is gone and we still wanna play.

[gentlemand]

yeah we need may need to send someone to help the other side or this will get very boring fast.

arguing with half wits takes work when all their (mostly defective) ammo is gone and we still wanna play.

Whomever volunteers will need to go deep undercover for quite some time. We'll also need to crowd fund medication, hypnosis, CBT, NLP and more otherwise their pro BSV persona will never leave the runway.

Even then a whole-mind oil change isn't going to change the facts, or total absence of them.

[Iamtutut]

Regarding Craig ex wife's testimony, don't miss this:





She needs the money, no wonder she was so evasive.

[Iamtutut]

I made a summary of Antonopoulos affidavit:










The so called adresses of the - there is no real - tulip trust correspond to the list submitted by Shadders, bugs included.
So a trust established in 2011 (in reality bought in 2014 as en empty shell) contains the list established in 2019.


And then comes the final touch, the last nail of the "Satoshi coins mined into the tulip trust" coffin.

[Lauda]

I have noticed that my flag against this user went silently without support and opposition. Please support it if you agree with it.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1014868
Reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5132383.0

[Iamtutut]

Another nice piece from Arthur Van Pelt here, regarding the affidavit of Craiggy's ex wife in the Kleiman case.

https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1260913504661504002

[xtraelv]

Proof by anno - worth nothing

grow up ppl and gain legal quality

Proof of ammo - priceless

https://medium.com/@paintedfrog/craig-wright-plagiarized-significant-portions-of-his-phd-thesis-and-tried-to-hide-it-80cd8f01459

Bird nests for botnets. Stunningly bad plagiarism. This guy's only talent is in conning the credulous.

Any more excuses from his fanbase is merely staggeringly wilful ignorance and wholly delusional.

[satire] Charles Sturt University new 2021 course offering:

[nutildah]

I didn't come here to change your mind. I just came here to prepare salt for your wounds.

Price of BSV on Feb 13th: $358
Price of BSV today: $193
Change: -46%

Price of BTC on Feb 13th: $10,350
Price of BTC today: $9733
Change: -6%

Ouch.

[coboguard]

Isn't he nice? Xd

https://craigwright.net/about/#professional-certifications

https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/satoshi-never-posted-on-bitcointalk

[BitcoinFX]

 

https://twitter.com/cyberat2600/status/1262527130040139777





BSVtards are absolute idiots.


Their whole shitcoin is based on a litany of lies

 

its based 100% on Satoshi and his work

and

honest mining.


... now you ve lied

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi and BSV is NOT Bitcoin ...

Going well in court I see NOT ...

more ...

"For who's interested, Jimmy Nguyen's deposition transcript is available on the court docket.
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.285454/gov.uscourts.wawd.285454.32.1.pdf "
- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1262512414454669319

...

Highlights thread (of 208 page .pdf) ...

...

"Things start going off the rails on page 60"
- https://twitter.com/cyberat2600/status/1262522618617434115
- https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1262522618617434115.html

 

[nutildah]

"For who's interested, Jimmy Nguyen's deposition transcript is available on the court docket.
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.285454/gov.uscourts.wawd.285454.32.1.pdf "
- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1262512414454669319

...

Highlights thread (of 208 page .pdf) ...

...

"Things start going off the rails on page 60"
- https://twitter.com/cyberat2600/status/1262522618617434115
- https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1262522618617434115.html

 

Thanks for sharing this. I've only skimmed through it as most of it is pretty boring, but it did get me wondering, does anyone involved in this trial remember what it is actually about? Ira's lawyers seem to be concentrating on making the case that Craig is not Satoshi, and Jimmy Nguyen is defending his stance that he is. Of course, if Craig and Dave didn't mine bitcoins, then Craig wouldn't be on the hook for anything... I think this trial is now entirely about whether Craig (and Dave) is Satoshi or not, Ira's proceeds or settlement be damned.

Jimmy on page 103:

"And more importantly if you look at the Court order even though Craig disagrees with it, the Judge decided to find that Craig was in a partnership with Dave Kleiman. A lot of people, even if they are detractors of Craig will acknowledge that Dave was a good person who participated in Bitcoin's early days."
...
From what I hear I think what I was referencing there I rely on looking at the Bitcoin blockchain industry and there are people who believe Dave Kleiman participated in the -- in helping Craig with Bitcoin.

Erm, are there really?

[JayJuanGee]

"For who's interested, Jimmy Nguyen's deposition transcript is available on the court docket.
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.285454/gov.uscourts.wawd.285454.32.1.pdf "
- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1262512414454669319

...

Highlights thread (of 208 page .pdf) ...

...

"Things start going off the rails on page 60"
- https://twitter.com/cyberat2600/status/1262522618617434115
- https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1262522618617434115.html

 

Thanks for sharing this. I've only skimmed through it as most of it is pretty boring, but it did get me wondering, does anyone involved in this trial remember what it is actually about? Ira's lawyers seem to be concentrating on making the case that Craig is not Satoshi, and Jimmy Nguyen is defending his stance that he is. Of course, if Craig and Dave didn't mine bitcoins, then Craig wouldn't be on the hook for anything... I think this trial is now entirely about whether Craig (and Dave) is Satoshi or not, Ira's proceeds or settlement be damned.

Huh?

I don't see how you can determine what a trial is about from various pieces of evidence and/or testimonials that are done in preparation for trial, which is one of the main purposes of taking depositions (to prepare for trial, explore issues and perhaps allow for settlement based on revelations of facts that could get presented at trial).

Frequently, testimony or evidence is gathered that is just meant to show one aspect of the case, and sometimes one lawyer or another might overlook some aspects of what game is being played based on the pleadings and the various issues before the court, and evidence that comes out in a deposition might not even be introduced in court, so it ends up NOT being evidence in the final decision and/or presentation.. but still can help the parties in terms of deciding what they might consider to be reasonable settlement proposals.  

Of course, the best attorneys are not going to lose sight of the pleadings, but they still might conclude that one piece of evidence favors them when it is looked at in terms of the pleadings the evidence might either work against them or end up being completely irrelevant.

Also, sometimes, even the lawyers might not understand the significance of certain evidence until they are putting together their final arguments and they might not even know what their final arguments are going to be until they actually know what evidence ends up getting presented in trial and how some of that evidence might end up getting framed during the proceedings including the fact that some evidence might be introduced for limited purposes or only to apply to certain issues in the case and not for other issues.  

So after the evidence is produced in trial, then they end up making the logical connections between evidence that they might not had previously considered to have been connected.

I am not suggesting that there might not be some allowance from either side to get caught up in the presentation of irrelevant evidence or evidence that is not really going to be able to be used by either side in the actual argumentation of the final issues, but sometimes attorneys might allow irrelevant evidence to get flushed out, especially during the deposition stages, because such pursuits could either lead to relevant evidence or at least the evidence is not hurting them in either way, even if it were presented in trial, and sure they are getting paid while they are participating in depositions, too.  

So, of course, depositions are done in order to prepare for trial and can have a tendency to go way beyond relevancies, and in the end, such witness might not even end up getting called by either side, even though they might have spent days or weeks taking their deposition and exploring various evidentiary avenues through such witness.

[Iamtutut]

The faketoshi LOL machine keeps going...

BTCs from the Shadder bug list supposed to be in the Tulip Trust spent today...
https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/gneg0n/of_course_the_cult_is_up_up_and_away_by_such_an/fr9t83x/

https://twitter.com/nondualrandy/status/1263136891123179521
"Two interesting facts from today:

1. A $BTC address from 2009 just moved coins

2. That address is located in this court document from Kleiman v Wright case"

[gentlemand]

Shame they didn't include a wee message to add extra irritation. If it were me I would've included 'CSW is a penis' in the transaction.

Is anyone keeping count of the other listed Tulip addresses that have moved? I presume they're slowly adding up as time goes by.

[BitcoinFX]

...snip...

Is anyone keeping count of the other listed Tulip addresses that have moved? I presume they're slowly adding up as time goes by.

Twitter thread ...

"Craig Wright - Tulip Trust. Done. Over and Out.

The moment we have all been waiting for: the total and utter destruction of the Tulip Trust Bitcoin list by Ira's counsel.

Irony has it that Craig just filed the Declarations of Stefan Boedeker and Andreas Antonopoulos himself."



- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1259231531874373633

[JayJuanGee]

...snip...

Is anyone keeping count of the other listed Tulip addresses that have moved? I presume they're slowly adding up as time goes by.

Twitter thread ...

"Craig Wright - Tulip Trust. Done. Over and Out.

The moment we have all been waiting for: the total and utter destruction of the Tulip Trust Bitcoin list by Ira's counsel.

Irony has it that Craig just filed the Declarations of Stefan Boedeker and Andreas Antonopoulos himself."



- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1259231531874373633

That is just a snipped of one of the declarations.  There is no actual declaration or attachment that is linked anywhere that i have seen, so far.

[hv_]

...snip...

Is anyone keeping count of the other listed Tulip addresses that have moved? I presume they're slowly adding up as time goes by.

Twitter thread ...

"Craig Wright - Tulip Trust. Done. Over and Out.

The moment we have all been waiting for: the total and utter destruction of the Tulip Trust Bitcoin list by Ira's counsel.

Irony has it that Craig just filed the Declarations of Stefan Boedeker and Andreas Antonopoulos himself."



- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1259231531874373633

That is just a snipped of one of the declarations.  There is no actual declaration or attachment that is linked anywhere that i have seen, so far.

Doesn't matter

They are claimed to be potentially part of the tulip trust, so nothing to see here except trolls making something up - walls of text...