- Defense of Bitcoin’s self-proclaimed inventor, Craig Wright, accuses the court of issuing a decision based on “personal attacks” against him.
- Brother of Wright’s former partner must provide evidence on Dave Kleiman’s academic background.
The legal plot in the case of Bitcoin’s self-proclaimed inventor, Craig Wright, and the family of his late partner, Dave Kleiman, should have ended long ago. However, Wright has found ways to further delay the case. In a new development, Wright’s lawyers introduced a document criticizing a court decision as being “based on a significant portion of personal attacks” against the alleged Bitcoin inventor and his legal representation.
Wright’s defense presents new arguments to withhold documents
According to a Southern District of Florida court decision, Wright was required to file about 10,000 documents related to the Tulip Trust. According to Judge Bruce Reinhart’s ruling, Wright had time until March to comply with the order. However, Wright’s defense has objected to the decision.
Wright’s attorneys presented excuses for the time it has taken to produce the documents. Apparently, Wright has requested documents from companies that have been liquidated or dissolved. In addition, Wright’s lawyers object that the order is “clearly erroneous and contrary to law”:
Order based in significant part on personal attacks against defendant and his Kenyan attorney that are totally unrelated to the legal issues. In their opposition [D.E. 445 (“Opposition”), plaintiffs accuse defendant of intentionally “hiding documents” and not complying with the “most basic discovery obligations.” (…).
Wright’s lawyers claim that the defendant has not only failed to present evidence, but they return to the rebuttal argument that the documents requested as evidence are unrelated to the case. Wright’s defense also claims that the Tulip Trust matter is a way of not presenting evidence:
Notably, plaintiffs offer no evidence to support those serious accusations. Instead, they drone on for pages about other subjects, such as Tulip trusts and bonded couriers.
The Tulip trust is at the heart of the case. According to Wright, it holds one million Bitcoin (BTC) that the defendant and his partner Kleiman allegedly mined when the cryptocurrency was created. These BTC are attributed to the inventor of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. However, Wright has not been able to prove its existence. A courier was supposed to bring the keys to prove its existence, but this person turned out to be a lawyer from Kenya, Denis Mayaka. The lawyer then filed a sworn statement claiming to administer the Tulip trust. The court dismissed the document and Mayaka’s participation.
Through his Twitter account, Dragon Industries co-founder Arthur van Pelt gave an update on the most relevant facts related to the case. As mentioned, the number of events related to this legal dispute can be overwhelming. One of the new findings is related to the studies of Wright’s former partner, Dave Kleiman.
According to a request from Wright, Dave’s brother, Ira Kleiman, must answer whether his brother had any of the titles “related to the type of intellectual property he allegedly developed”. That is, Ira must say whether his brother had doctorates or other degrees that prove he could have developed Bitcoin. Van Pelt stated on Twitter: note that Craig also does not have the background he is requesting.
https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1247847603208937473
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter and don’t miss any hot news anymore! Do you like our price indices?
