- Craig Wright has failed in his attempt to get evidence of his forging thrown out of his case against COPA
- Wright had argued that evidence that he forged documents to try and claim ownership of the Tulip Trust coins was not relevant
- The judge disagreed, saying that it added to Wright’s “credibility”
Craig Wright has claimed that he wanted documents from the Kleiman trial admitted into evidence for his case against Cryptocurrency Open Patent Alliance (COPA) after losing a battle to keep them out. Wright had demanded that documents relating to his claims of having 1.1 million bitcoin locked up in the Tulip Trust, and other related documents which have been identified as forgeries as far back as 2014, were inadmissible because they weren’t related to his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, but the judge in the case has disagreed, saying that the add to Wright’s “credibility”, or otherwise, as a candidate.
COPA Suing Wright Over Bitcoin Whitepaper Ownership
COPA filed an injunction against Wright in April this year, claiming that he doesn’t have copyright over the Bitcoin whitepaper. Such a ruling, were it to be made, would bring a swift end to any legal challenge Wright attempts to make against anyone in the UK over the Bitcoin whitepaper, which he sees as crucial to his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, and which Bitcoin developer Cobra Bitcoin has already been a victim of.
Wright tried to strike out parts of the COPA suit relating to his history of forging because they weren’t relevant to the COPA case, but the judge in the case, Judge Paul Matthews, disagreed:
The defendant argues that they are or would amount to satellite litigation, they will cause unfair prejudice and also cause an undue burden on the defendant. I do not accept these submissions. In my judgement, these questions are exactly the kind of debate which will need to be had in order to test the defendant’s claim that he is indeed Satoshi Nakamoto.
As for Wright trying to sidestep the issues of his claim to be Satoshi by getting some claims dismissed, Judge Matthews was equally as matter of fact on that issue:
To my mind they are not unfairly prejudicial, or an undue burden, but on the contrary exactly what must be faced.
Wright and Ayre Twist Logic in Defense
Wright and his sugar daddy Calvin Ayre naturally tried to paint this as a win, with Wright saying that “I want the trust documents in court”, which begs the question of why his law firm tried to get them thrown out, and Ayre taking the usual circuitous route around logic:
it was not a win…you guys will end up paying fees for the piece you dropped at the last minute before the hearing that was the real reason for the hearing and Craig has no big deal with the stuff that you are enabled to keep in.
— Calvin Ayre (@CalvinAyre) December 23, 2021
you guys are are like kids really…this is embarrasing to read but is a good example of Crypto maturity. Its also not real…all that matters is the final verdict..this is all side show dancing and in this case you are lying even about what happened.
— Calvin Ayre (@CalvinAyre) December 23, 2021
The COPA case is likely to be heard in 2022.
