Hodlonaut Trial

[o_e_l_e_o]

The KPMG report is now available for viewing here: https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/xlilzv/fresh_from_oslo_kpmg_report_into_craig_wrights/

And a thread briefly discussing just a few of the issues here: https://nitter.it/wizsecurity/status/1573295840248172545

My personal favorite is where the ">" symbol is changed to a "<" symbol in a different font, not only making the forgery completely obvious, but also making the equations in the whitepaper incorrect and meaningless. The true work of Satoshi. Lol.

[1715148469]

1715148469

[1715148469]

1715148469

[Lucius]

My personal favorite is where the ">" symbol is changed to a "<" symbol in a different font, not only making the forgery completely obvious, but also making the equations in the whitepaper incorrect and meaningless. The true work of Satoshi. Lol.

This is proof that even with a lot of money and an army of lawyers, you still have to be intelligent in order to create a top-notch forgery, which might then be believed by an inexperienced/bribed judge or some senseless commission or something, as was the case in Colombia. Anywhere else in the civilized world with a somewhat independent judiciary, Faketoshi and similar fraudsters don't stand a chance and are starting to look more and more like people who have started to lose touch with reality.

[o_e_l_e_o]

This is proof that even with a lot of money and an army of lawyers, you still have to be intelligent in order to create a top-notch forgery

It is becoming increasingly clear that CSW's complete ineptitude with all things bitcoin extends to all things technical and computing related. These forgeries are some of the most obviously faked things I can possibly imagine. The whitepaper equations being invalidated and him not even realizing are hilarious. Here's another hilarious one: https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1573577987525574656#m. He tried to forge Kleiman's signature by typing it in a handwriting font.

I do wonder why his lawyers allowed this nonsense to be submitted? Are they completely incompetent too? Or did CSW submit it without their knowledge?

[dkbit98]

I do wonder why his lawyers allowed this nonsense to be submitted? Are they completely incompetent too? Or did CSW submit it without their knowledge?

LOL I can't believe he is so stupid to use public font Otto that is available for free commercial use  
His law team are well aware of this scam but now they have no other choice than to continue playing this circus show with him as a main clown.

Wait a second, I just received few more ''secret messages'' written by ''DaVe KleiMaN'' using exact same handwritting:




https://www.1001fonts.com/otto-font.html

[DaveF]

...His law team are well aware of this scam but now they have no other choice than to continue playing this circus show with him as a main clown....

So long as he or his benefactors keep paying I don't think they care. Makes you wonder how many cases are in the courts because the lawyers involved are just taking all their clients money because if they don't they know someone else will.

As for everything else, it's obvious that they are bad forgeries but it's also obvious that BSV is a scam shitcoin and people keep flocking to it, so there is that side too.

Hopefully the judge nails CSW to wall so to speak and we can all move on.

-Dave

[JayJuanGee]

This is proof that even with a lot of money and an army of lawyers, you still have to be intelligent in order to create a top-notch forgery

It is becoming increasingly clear that CSW's complete ineptitude with all things bitcoin extends to all things technical and computing related. These forgeries are some of the most obviously faked things I can possibly imagine. The whitepaper equations being invalidated and him not even realizing are hilarious. Here's another hilarious one: https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1573577987525574656#m. He tried to forge Kleiman's signature by typing it in a handwriting font.

I do wonder why his lawyers allowed this nonsense to be submitted? Are they completely incompetent too? Or did CSW submit it without their knowledge?

I would imagine that Craig is way smarter than his lawyers (and the lawyers of the other side too)... It's part of the reason why guys like him tend to have to rotate through attorneys because they are always way smarter than their lawyers.  

Many attorneys (the more integrity-based ones) do not like having such rogue (renegade) clients, but like DaveF mentioned, many attorneys will still go through the representation motions if the pay keeps flowing and makes up for their inconveniences and possible risks to their licenses by representing such scammers/scandals.

[Wind_FURY]

It's not over?

How high is Hodlnaut's probability to win the case? I believe high, but would he still be required by the court to pay more than €200,000 like after the proceedings were finished in the U.K.? It's a personal win, but also a loss too, and if none of the cases prove that Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi, big loss for the Bitcoin community.

For those people who followed the legal drama but stopped, this is the timeline, https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/timeline-of-hodlonaut-craig-wright-case

[o_e_l_e_o]

Many attorneys (the more integrity-based ones) do not like have such rogue (renegade) clients, but like DaveF mentioned, many attorneys will still go through the representation motions if the pay keeps flowing and makes up for their inconveniences and possible risks to their license by representing such scammers/scandals.

Yeah. At the start of the proceedings however many years ago, CSW was being represented by Ontier. At some point he changed over to these new layers from Schjodt. In the trial he claimed it was because his previous lawyers refused to let him bring forward witnesses (). Perhaps it was actually his previous lawyers insisted on some kind of hard evidence rather than just hearsay, and when presented with the stack of obviously forged documents, emails, code, etc. which ended up being submitted, they just noped out of there realizing that CSW is a complete liability. But as you say, there is always someone else willing to take on losing cases if they will be paid handsomely for doing so. And although costs have not yet been submitted, I've been reading suggestions CSW's legal fees were more than double those of Hodlonaut.

[franky1]

the other thing CSW forged which many are not talking about and CSW didnt do much care in editing to seem plausible to his timeline. is that "his first version" of bitcoin code (0.0.8 ) which was meant to be released to specific people CSW knew before 2009.. had a genesis hash.. of a block that contained the quote of a newspaper headline that was not even published until 2009
edit
(not the "version" in latest case reveal. but one he released as "2008 proof" a couple years ago.. (he loves to edit. then edit then edit then edit changing his story multiple times over the years))
..
you have to remember 2 key points about CSW motives
1. he doesnt care, win or lose..
2. he sees each public event he attends, every debate, every interaction, every court case as a recruitment campaign..

he doesnt want to show accurate information. he wants to show things with flaws.
why.. because if idiots contact him and believe his narrative he automatically knows the person contacting him is a idiot that believes anything
thus an easy new victim to con

its also a display of how he can scam people and get away with it. which is another recruitment method. greedy immoral people seeing a guy get away with scamming people. going to court but never seeing prison makes greedy other scammers want to get in on the game

scamming people in the amounts of millions but only having to pay hundreds of thousands in court costs.. is what some call "cost of doing business", as it scares off his victims from trying to sue him. knowing it ends up costing them more than they lost individually

[o_e_l_e_o]

the other thing CSW forged which many are not talking about and CSW didnt do much care in editing to seem plausible to his timeline. is that "his first version" of bitcoin code (0.0.8) which was meant to be released to specific people CSW knew before 2009.. had a genesis hash.. of a block that contained the quote of a newspaper headline that was not even published until 2009

There are so many problems with CSW's 0.0.8 code that it cannot be believed by a thinking person. He somehow included a bug fix which Hal Finney wouldn't point out for several months, but then reversed the bug fix for when he released 0.1.0. He somehow includes a compressed bitcoin address, support for which wouldn't be implemented for several years. His 0.0.8 file has an incorrect checksum, but its checksum just magically happens to validate perfectly for version 0.1.0. He includes code plagiarized directly from this forum, including cutting off early with incomplete code as a post on this forum did when it hit the character limit (apparently he was too stupid to realize the next post in the thread had the rest of the code).

The whole thing is an absolute smorgasbord of incompetence.

[n0nce]

the other thing CSW forged which many are not talking about and CSW didnt do much care in editing to seem plausible to his timeline. is that "his first version" of bitcoin code (0.0. which was meant to be released to specific people CSW knew before 2009.. had a genesis hash.. of a block that contained the quote of a newspaper headline that was not even published until 2009

Damn, is that for real? Is this supposed '0.0.8 version' of his uploaded anywhere? That's hilarious!!

he doesnt want to show accurate information. he wants to show things with flaws.
why.. because if idiots contact him and believe his narrative he automatically knows the person contacting him is a idiot that believes anything
thus an easy new victim to con

That's a very good point. It reminds me of email scams apparently being bad / low effort by design, such that they only reach people who are (1) dumb to fall for scams and (2) probably too poor to bring charges against the scammers.

By sending an initial email that's obvious in its shortcomings, the scammers are isolating the most gullible targets. If you trash their email, that's fine. They don't want you, someone from whom there's virtually no chance of receiving any money. They want people who, faced with a ridiculous email, still don't recognize its illegitimacy.

Sooo, did we just determine CSW is not only not satoshi, but also a 'Nigerian Prince scammer'?

[franky1]

ok so i have a tough question to ask the last 4 people that posted..
it might seem harsh and tough to answer and may seem like a poke. but i feel the answer will answer their own biggest question of why is CSW lying and his partners believe/follow him even when there is evidence that debunks what he says

i am not interested in yet another social drama debate. im not even asking you to answer which would out yourselves, but just think about the answer for your own purpose

so first a describer
within the last 5years . some individuals that dont like researching have been fooled via social bias and echo chamber games of a narrative they trust due to social allegiances/loyalties  where the story is that there was a btc upgrade that was, in their belief a natural, soft consensus upgrade.
.. but the only proof ever shown of their narrative was each other quoting other people as their source of proof(echo chambers)
vs
the hard facts of node code of mandatory hard fork. petition/agreement document of economic nodes agreeing to flag for the mandatory effort to activate it with a fake promise of a extra upgrade later to appease the upgrade objectors.
and backed up by the hard immutable data of the blockchain plus the data of the altcoin created at the date. which all show that the mandatory contentious hardfork occurred..

where these people have been loyally and robustly trying to push the fake narrative soft upgrade narrative for upto 5 years. and want to cause debate if anyone talks about the real events

so the question (its rhetorical and i dont need to know it. just answer it in your mind for your own enlightenment)

why after 5 years do certain people still prefer to follow the social drama narrative of lies, just to back up and be obedient to their buddy group.
rather than admit they fell for social drama lies
rather than just come clean.
rather than realise there is actual evidence that debunks the narrative. rather than admit they were wrong, get over it and move on with their lives

i dont need to know the answer. the answer is for yourselves to think about and realise that people are too easy to trust other people based on some social/greed reason. where they even want to play dumb or ignorant at the hard data that debunks their beliefs
CSW has never shown good knowledge of his supposed IT, data forensics degree's but he really is well versed in his theology degree and he uses it more then any other degree he supposedly has

theology: the study in how people believe in something unseen/mystical without needing proof

[AnotherAlt]

Well, well, well. A lot of things are happening here. I saw the previous thread but didn't bother to read the OP. So, I didn't get what was happening. Yesterday I noticed a thread on Meta, and I came from there to an unmoderated thread than here. I read a few articles and then most of the posts. I was wondering what the heck CSW is. I was aware of this fraudster and knew that some legal action was taken against him. That's back in 2020, I guess. I didn't know who filed the case. That's why I didn't understand the Term Hodlonaut. That's all before reading the BitcoinMagazine timeline.
Now, Who supports CSW? Are there any members from this forum who are also supporting CSW?
Why it's too hard to prove him wrong? It's been a few years already. You guys won't be able to win or lose, and it will hang like this for a decade until the court has some intelligent judge. They don't even understand the mechanism of Bitcoin. At least their lawyer should be more educated about Bitcoin. Just Ask CSW to sign a message from Satoshi's Bitcoin Address. Ask him to Access His Bitcointalk account. Ask him to access the email: satoshin@gmx.com. He needs all those to prove his claim, and I know he won't be able to do that. I wonder how the court will judge them if they don't understand the mechanism. CSW is getting special attention from the Bitcoin community. By Attending every press conference and other places, he promoted his scams, and people knew about his project. It's another proof that he is not Satoshi. Why would Satoshi need to create another coin with the same supply while Bitcoin dominates the market?

[JayJuanGee]

Are there any members from this forum who are also supporting CSW?
Why it's too hard to prove him wrong? It's been a few years already. You guys won't be able to win or lose, and it will hang like this for a decade until the court has some intelligent judge.

....... It's another proof that he is not Satoshi.....

Of course in the court system, depending on the kind of case that is litigated, there might be some questions about whether CSW is actually Satoshi, and many times, there is no need to really answer that question in terms of whether anyone needs to prove that CSW is not satoshi.. because the burden is actually (or should be) on CSW to show that he is Satoshi.. not for others to prove that he is not.

Of course, the lower threshold has been met many times, including 2015/2016 when CSW started becoming quite vocal about supposedly being Satoshi and never actually proving it when he has the burden to prove it.

So the court cases get confusing depending on what is the issue that is being discussed, and in a court case like this, the initial lawsuit was in the UK filed by CSW saying that Hodlonaut had sufficiently defamed CSW and caused damage to CSW through such defamations.  So the trial was filed in Norway in order to attempt to preempt the ability to go forward with the UK trial to establish that Hodlonaut could not be sued in the UK over such issue because the Norway courts had resolved the matter. 

So then sometimes there can be questions regarding who has the burden of proof and who has the burdens to produce evidence, and these kinds of issues will vary from court to court in terms of what kinds of questions that the court believes that it is attempting to resolve so then there would be questions in terms of whether the charging party has met its burden of production and its burden of proof.. so in this case Hodlonaut had become the charging party because he was trying to preclude the bringing of the case in which CSW had been the charging party.

But if we get back to the question of defamation and whether Hodlonaut had based his accusations (defamation) against CSW in ways that were sufficiently reasonable and fair in terms of what others had thought about CSW based on information then available during the times of the allegedly defamatory statements, but then there can be some value in producing evidence to show that the alleged defamatory statements were actually true, even though when there is not exactly freedom of speech in some locations, then the truth of the statements might not even be a complete defense to whether a person could end up being liable if there are assertions that the statements in themselves had caused the damages (in this case damages to CSW's reputation and even income capabilities). 

I guess part of my point is that questions regarding who has what burdens can become confused, even though the court will likely come out with a decision to say whether or not Hodlonaut met his burden to sufficiently establish that he had not defamed CSW to a high enough level that would preemptively cause the Norway case from being able to be decided in the UK because the matter had already been sufficiently resolved by the Norway case.

No matter what the court says, it would be enough to establish CSW as not being Satoshi, and I am sure that they would get a lot of pushback if they were to proclaim that he is Satoshi, but in either case, the vast majority of regular bitcoiners (and even shitcoiners) realize that CSW has the burden of production and the burden of proof to show that he is Satoshi and he has not even come close to meeting either of those burdens... the burden of production would be providing signed keys from known satoshi blocks and the burden of proof would be to convince us that those signed keys were valid and that those really are satoshi blocks or whatever further argumentation that might be needed to connect the evidence provided with the logic regarding why CSW is satoshi... which many of us know that if CSW had the capabilities to accomplish such, he would have already done it... so all these alternative means are hardly convincing and even many times go the opposite of what CSW is supposed to be trying to show (that he is Satoshi).

[Upgrade00]

so all these alternative means are hardly convincing and even many times go the opposite of what CSW is supposed to be trying to show (that he is Satoshi).

They definitely are unconvincing, but that might not be the intention at all. CSW knows he's not Satoshi, and knows the public knows that too. He also knows he has no proof to convince us otherwise, so rather than convincing, he's intention might be to bully everyone to at best, not challenge his stand that he indeed is Satoshi, even if you do not believe it.

This sort of trial is straining on those involved. Hodlonaut would have wanted none of this publicity and financial demands that comes with the suit, many others would also not want that. So bullying people to silence, would leave none to challenge his stance or proof the inaccuracies in his position to the world, or court.

[gmaxwell]

My personal favorite is where the ">" symbol is changed to a "<" symbol in a different font, not only making the forgery completely obvious, but also making the equations in the whitepaper incorrect and meaningless. The true work of Satoshi. Lol.

To be fair, that change alone would be consistent with it being a "draft" that he supposedly fixed.  What blows that up is that it's the correct symbol in the other font.  So it was impossible for it to be an error, the wrong character had to come from being substituted with a font that didn't exist until long after the paper's supposed date. Same issue that lambda has.  It is funny that when checking his forgery wright didn't even notice wingdings replacing his mathmatics.

but he really is well versed in his theology degree and he uses it more then any other degree he supposedly has

Ironically, the theology degree is almost certainly the fakest of them all. It looks like the situation there was that he wanted varrious masters degrees for self promotion purposes and learned that his crackerjack school would grant credit for IT certificates (which are done via computer based testing, which presumably he cheated at). But a problem he should have faced there is that he had no undergraduate degree to meet the prerequisites. So he cooked up a fake theology degree because who the heck is going to check on that?

They definitely are unconvincing, but that might not be the intention at all. CSW knows he's not Satoshi, and knows the public knows that too. He also knows he has no proof to convince us otherwise, so rather than convincing, he's intention might be to bully everyone to at best, not challenge his stand that he indeed is Satoshi, even if you do not believe it.

This sort of trial is straining on those involved. Hodlonaut would have wanted none of this publicity and financial demands that comes with the suit, many others would also not want that. So bullying people to silence, would leave none to challenge his stance or proof the inaccuracies in his position to the world, or court.

I think harassment and intimidation is clearly a primary motivation-- he's pretty much said so himself in some of his more unhinged rants on his public slack (during hodl he was falsely alleging that the slack was private: Not so, not any more than a newspaper you have to pay for a subscription to is private).

Mr. Wright himself must know that he has zero chance in court-- even where he might have the chance of a massively confused court he manages to submit enough easily beyond-a-reasonable-doubt-provable-forgeries that his eventual loss is guaranteed.   But the same may not be true for the people financing him (and paying for his lifestyle).  I think it's likely that he's suckered various high-wealth-low-scruples people into thinking that they're going to "won all the cases" and get a jackpot of tens of billions of dollars.

It's really just a new take on a very classic con:  I convince you that I'm a card hustling savant but down on my luck because I got caught by the last casino (AU tax office) and now I can't finance my big comeback. The mark gets the idea of financing me so I can take down the big win (convince some court to magically award Satoshis Bitcoin), and I accept a split with the mark.  I pretend to work with the mark to get the big score, but I'm really just pocketing as much of the mark's money as I can while I keep dragging out the conclusion.   The fact that I can use the process to harass and intimidate anyone who gets in my way is just a super bonus.

God knows what they could pull off if they really did manage to silence and intimidate everyone.

Before being the target of litigation I really didn't appreciate how taxing it is.  Especially being in a prolonged situation where you can count on any word you speak being heavily misconstrued, where you have no hope of a gain only a hope of minimizing losses,  where your future schedule is dictated by what is by all appearances an organized crime group directed by a madman. Where you don't know if you will be hit with millions of dollars in costs if donors run into issues or be forced to abandon a competent defense if you can't pay them. Lately they've been trying like hell to silence me off the internet completely.

It's like how people romanticize war, but war is not romantic-- it's hell.  While I'm sure being the target of litigation is not comparable to war,  there are some similarities-- your future being taken out of your hands, the constant powerless *waiting* for the next disaster to strike commanding a immediate emergency response, and the fact that any misstep could guarantee your loss, even against a generally incompetent opponent. Lots of people want to help but there is really little anyone else can do except sending supplies... And while normally litigation doesn't involve the risk of death, when dealing with a criminal cartel that thinks you're in the way of billions of dollars in profit that risk can't be discounted completely (certainly there have been enough threats, including by wright himself).





FWIW, I was on the webex for most of the trial and so I directly heard all the parts in English --there were quite a few that haven't been published-- and had some other translation of much of the rest.  Based on the twitter feeds I think Hodlo's position is looking good, but my impression from the trial was even stronger.  There were a number of cases where I was disappointed to not hear Holdonaut's lawyer press a witness only for the *judge* to turn around and do so.

There were a number of cases of perjury that should be prosecutable but experience says that just won't happen.

In general the Norwegian courts came across as very ... soft. Not pressing witnesses into corners when it seemed likely that doing so would yield an admission or a contradiction,  I guess we'll see if that translates into an equally soft rulings.  The judge very much was paying attention and asked many highly intelligent questions.

[buwaytress]

you have to remember 2 key points about CSW motives
1. he doesnt care, win or lose..
2. he sees each public event he attends, every debate, every interaction, every court case as a recruitment campaign..

Very important to be reminded about. He's not the only one out there who already do not give a damn about their reputation (or are unable to give a damn due to some socio-psychological issue).

They want followers, they want exposure, visibility. Because for every one of us who can pinpoint his forgery/fraud, there will be many more who don't, who believe CW, who buy him and want more. I know, because I've met some of them!

So perhaps, we need to be careful about feeding that flame.

[gmaxwell]

They will take money from the rubes on twitter for sure-- but most of those folks aren't a rounding error in terms of the cost of their litigation. They are spending many millions on litigation.  Do the math on what they're likely getting from the rabble.  Pretending to just be trolls that want attention is part of the disguise that creates an ineffective response to the attack.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Now, Who supports CSW? Are there any members from this forum who are also supporting CSW?

Mainly rich idiots he has fooled in to believing his scam. There are a handful of users on this forum who pop up occasionally with their support for BSV, but usually leave after being confronted with mountains of evidence against CSW for which they have no rebuttal.

Why it's too hard to prove him wrong?

It's not, really. We all know he is wrong. He has been proved wrong multiple times, from signed messages from addresses he claimed to own calling him a fraud, through to complete dismantling of the forgeries he presents as "evidence". But CSW has been smart enough so far to make sure none of his court cases are to determine whether or not he is Satoshi (because he isn't), but are on parallel nonsense like "These tweets hurt my feelings" and "The devs are legally bound to fork the code".

They definitely are unconvincing, but that might not be the intention at all. CSW knows he's not Satoshi, and knows the public knows that too. He also knows he has no proof to convince us otherwise, so rather than convincing, he's intention might be to bully everyone to at best, not challenge his stand that he indeed is Satoshi, even if you do not believe it.

100% this.

It is funny that when checking his forgery wright didn't even notice wingdings replacing his mathmatics.

Easily explained by the fact CSW does not understand the math in the whitepaper and therefore had no idea his forgery was incorrect. There are similar instances of him incorrectly plagiarizing equations in many of his academic publications and not realizing his mistakes because he doesn't understand what he is plagiarizing.

[NotATether]

so the question (its rhetorical and i dont need to know it. just answer it in your mind for your own enlightenment)

why after 5 years do certain people still prefer to follow the social drama narrative of lies, just to back up and be obedient to their buddy group.
rather than admit they fell for social drama lies
rather than just come clean.
rather than realise there is actual evidence that debunks the narrative. rather than admit they were wrong, get over it and move on with their lives

It's largely because of the basic egoistic nature of most people being too proud and arrogant to admit that they were in the wrong, so in order to hide that, they make nonsensical excuses which lead to more nonsensical theories and so on.