-
The
second
week
of
a
highly
anticipated
U.K.
trial
that
could
decide
if
Australian
computer
scientist
Craig
Wright
invented
Bitcoin
kicked
off
Monday. -
During
his
cross-examination,
Wright
continued
to
place
blame
on
a
number
of
individuals
and
entities
for
inconsistencies
in
his
arguments.
Australian
computer
scientist
Craig
Wright
unleashed
fresh
allegations
against
several
members
of
the
crypto
community
and
was
in
turn
accused
of
offering
different
versions
of
the
same
story
in
court
as
his
cross-examination
in
a
trial
over
his
claims
of
having
invented
Bitcoin
(BTC)
continued
in
a
U.K.
high
court.
The
Crypto
Open
Patent
Alliance
(COPA),
a
nonprofit
backed
by
crypto
players
such
as
Coinbase,
Microstrategy
and
Twitter
founder
Jack
Dorsey,
sued
Wright
in
2021,
accusing
him
of
committing
forgeries
of
“an
industrial
scale”
in
trying
to
prove
he
is
Satoshi.
The
second
week
of
the
highly
anticipated
trial
kicked
off
on
Monday
with
Wright’s
cross-examination
by
counsel
COPA
continuing
for
a
fifth
day.
In
a
particularly
heated
exchange
following
a
lunch
break,
COPA
counsel,
Bird
&
Bird
LLP’s
Jonathan
Hough,
asked
Wright
to
stop
making
“irrelevant
allegations”
and
to
“answer
the
question.”
Wright
had
just
accused
COPA
members
of
turning
Bitcoin
into
a
“money-go-up-token
scam.”
When
Wright
protested,
presiding
Judge
James
Mellor
intervened,
saying
arguments
about
the
current
state
of
the
Bitcoin
system
were
not
going
to
help
him
make
a
judgment
on
the
case
–
which
is
focused
on
whether
or
not
Wright
is
Satoshi
Nakamoto,
the
pseudonymous
author
of
Bitcoin’s
manifesto,
called
the
white
paper.
“Counsel
is
quite
right
to
stop
you
because
it
sheds
no
light
whatsoever
on
the
issue
I
have
to
decide.
Do
you
understand?”
Mellor
said,
to
which
Wright
replied:
“I
do.”
Since
last
week,
COPA
has
been
trying
to
poke
holes
in
material
–
called
“primary
reliance
documents”
–
that
Wright
has
submitted
to
the
court
as
evidence
that
proves
he
invented
the
popular
cryptocurrency.
Wright
continued
to
blame
a
host
of
reasons
and
people
for
inconsistencies
pointed
out
by
Hough.
Similarities
between
a
dissertation
by
Wright
and
a
paper
authored
by
Bird
&
Bird
alum
Hilary
Pearson
were
blamed
on
an
attribution
error
made
by
third-party
editors.
Wright
also
sought
to
blame
his
ex-wife
Lynn
Wright’s
testimony
in
a
previous
case
–
that
she
didn’t
recall
him
ever
mentioning
Bitcoin
–
on
her
battle
with
breast
cancer.
Although
he
had
previously
testified
in
another
case
that
he’d
typed
an
email
to
the
father
of
Dave
Kleimann
saying
“Dave”
and
Wright
were
two
of
the
“three
key
people
behind
bitcoin,”
the
computer
scientist
went
back
on
his
story
Monday,
saying
he
had
someone
under
his
employment
type
and
send
the
email
to
make
Kleimann’s
father
“feel
proud
of
him.”
(He
also
said
during
the
same
exchange
on
Monday
that
he
had
typed
the
sentence
but
not
the
email
itself.)
“The
versions
just
keep
changing,
don’t
they?”
Hough
asked
during
that
exchange,
to
which
Wright
replied:
“No.”
Wright
also
insists
he
didn’t
think
much
of
Bitcoin
at
the
time
of
its
creation
in
2009
–
which
he
calls
his
invention.
“I
thought
it
might
get
me
either
a
partnership
or
a
professorship
with
tenure.
And
that
was
about
the
extent
of
what
I
thought
of
my
invention,”
he
said.
Wright’s
cross-examination
will
continue
at
least
through
Wednesday,
and
the
court
may
also
consider
a
new
“box”
of
evidence
he
said
his
wife
has
just
discovered.
