A federal judge in Florida dismissed the request of CW (Craig Wright), who claimed to be the Bitcoin creator. CSW hopes to dismiss a lawsuit involving his former partner Dave Kleiman, who was accused of stealing billions of dollars worth of Kleiman.
Florida District Judge Beth Bloom quoted Sir Walter Scott as saying, “When we first practice cheating, weaved a complicated network.” Bloom said that CSW repeatedly misled the court and provided “contradictory Statement."
- Destiny and reincarnation: the moment of Bitcoin's production reduction
- Market analysis: BTC pulled up in the morning, the bulls began to test the disk
- Bitcoin's transaction price has fallen below the average mining cost
- What is hidden behind the high premium of Bitfinex BTC?
- Russian parliamentary representative: Hold Bitcoin legal, but trade and mine or be fined
- Market Analysis: Falling as expected, risk control is the number one priority
A year ago, the personal representative of computer scientist Dave Kleiman filed a lawsuit for the first time. It is alleged that Kleiman "helped" CSW invented Bitcoin. According to the lawsuit, shortly after Kleiman's death in early 2013, CSW defrauded his former partner of 1.1 million bitcoins from W&K Info Defense Research LLC, a bitcoin mining company jointly owned by the two.
In this lawsuit, a key argument of the CW defense lawyer is to question Kleiman's shareholding in W&K, trying to prove that there are other partners, and a hypothetical agreement between CSW and Kleiman that Kleiman has given up his shares.
But the court did not buy it, according to the judge, mainly because the CSW was not credible at all.
“The defendant argued that the court could not rely on the statements and evidence he provided, nor could he rule that the statements and evidence were untrue.”
Bloom cites a statement from a lawyer at CSW:
"Lord, if everything is a lie, then when CSW signs a contract or makes a statement, what they rely on is not credible."
"He seems to think that although many of his inconsistent statements are responsible for the confusion of W&K ownership, the court should still use these statements as a basis to challenge the court's subject matter jurisdiction. In essence, the defendant used the evidence provided as his shield. ""
But this strategy is obviously not desirable. Bloom said:
“Unfortunately, the court records are full of examples of the defendant’s inconsistent testimony. When weighing the evidence, the court found that the defendant’s testimony was not credible at all.”
In short, the CSW motion to withdraw the case was dismissed. The case will continue to be heard in the Federal Court of Florida. A federal judge pointed out that it gave many contradictory testimonies. Waiting for the CSW is a contempt for the motion.
Yesterday, a trial record was issued at the end of July, and the testimony provided by Bitmessage developer Jonathan Warren showed that CSW had forged documents.
Some of the evidence that CSW submitted to the court was from a letter on the Bitmessage platform. Warren said in court that CSW may have forged documents because the date of the letter he provided was October 22, 2012, but Bitmessage did not exist.