Stupid Things Craig Wright Said in His Latest Stupid Trial

Over
the
course
of
nearly
30
hours
of
cross-examination,
Craig
Steven
Wright,
the
Australian
man
who
claims
to
be
Bitcoin’s
pseudonymous
creator,
Satoshi
Nakamoto,
has
been
raked
through
the
coals.
The
self-described
computer
scientist,
economist,
cryptographer,
patent
writer,
author,
lawyer,
pastor,
master
of
martial
arts
and
mathematician
(in
other
words:
fabulist)
has
been
accused
of
misrepresenting
facts,

told
by
the
judge
to
stay
on
topic
and

silenced
by
his
own
lawyers.

This
is
an
excerpt
from
The
Node
newsletter,
a
daily
roundup
of
the
most
pivotal
crypto
news
on
CoinDesk
and
beyond.
You
can
subscribe
to
get
the
full


newsletter
here.

For
years,
Wright
has
been
harassing
and
threatening
Bitcoin
developers
and
users,
filing
libel
suits
and
gag
orders,
after
claiming
ownership
of
the
intellectual
property
behind
the
world’s
first
cryptocurrency.
And
it’s
that
“chilling
effect,”
that
the
nonprofit
Crypto
Open
Patent
Alliance
(COPA)
was
trying
to
shut
down
when
it
filed
suit
in
2021
—
the
most
aggressive
attempt
yet
to
settle
once
and
for
all
that
Wright
is
not
what
he
says
he
is.

Jonathan
Hough,
COPA’s
lead
lawyer,
argued
in
his
opening
statement
that
over
the
past
eight
years,
ever
since
Wright
came
into
the
public
eye,
he
has
committed
fraud
on
“an
industrial
scale.”
During
the
cross-examination,
which
wrapped
up
Wednesday,
Hough
accused
CSW
of

forging
or
manipulating
documents
related
to
the
development
of
Bitcoin
and
misunderstanding
the
basics
of
the
system
Wright
supposedly
built.

See
also:


Craig
Wright
Witnesses
Face
Questions
About
Their
Memories
in
COPA
Trial

That
said,
the
burden
is
on
the
plaintiffs
to
prove
Wright
is
wrong.
And
Wright,
who
has
been
described
as

(largely)
calm
and
articulate
in
the
courtroom,
certainly
has
convinced
people
in
the
past
(including
his
benefactor,
billionaire
online
gambling
magnate
Calvin
Ayre).
For
many
onlookers,
however,
the
case
has
already
been
made:
Wright,
by
taking
the
stand,
simply
discredited
himself.
There
have
been
too
many
inconsistencies,
too
many
happenstances
and
too
much
misdirection
to
be
believed.

The
trial
is
expected
to
go
until
mid-March.
For
now,
CoinDesk
has
collected
some
of
the
most
bizarre,
asinine
and
head
scratching
moments
from
the
case
so
far.

The
opening
statement
from
Wright’s
lawyers,
given
by
Lord
Anthony
Grabiner,
was
almost
an
indictment
in
itself.
Put
in
the
tough
position
of
explaining
Wright’s
reluctance
to
show
how
he
can
interact
with
any
of
the
millions
of
Bitcoin
linked
to
Satoshi
(thus
easily
proving
his
right
to
the
Satoshi
mantle),
Grabiner
said
it
was
down
to

“philosophical
differences.”
Apparently
Wright’s
“unusual”
behavior
of
flip
flopping
on
whether
to
sign
a
transaction,
as
he
pledged
to
do
in
2016,
would
conflict
with
Wright’s
“core
belief”
in
privacy.
Putting
aside
that
Wright
lives
a
very
public
life,
Wright
has
also
criticized
the
pseudonymous
aspects
of
crypto,
saying
it’s
part
of
the
reason
Bitcoin
has
become
a
hotbed
for
crime.

Wright,
who
claims
to
be
working
towards
five
PhDs,
apparently
does
not
know
the
very
basics
of
coding.
During
a
cross-examination
by
Alexander
Gunning
KC
asking
about
PGP
keys
and
cryptography,
Wright
was
asked
about
“unsigned
integers,”
(used
essentially
to
determine
whether
a
string
of
data
will
have
a
+
or
–
prefix),
and
wasn’t
able
to.
Longtime
crypto
advocate
Michael
Parenti
noted
the
unsigned
integer
function
was
used
over

500
times
in
the
original
Bitcoin
source
code.
What
was
meant
to
be
a
routine
line
of
questioning
to
enter
basic
facts
into
the
record
about
the
Bitcoin
source
code
may
be
the
single
moment
remembered
for
years
to
come.

As

@bitnorbert,
who
has
been
following
the
trial,
said
on
X’:

“HE
COULDN’T
EXPLAIN
WHAT
AN
UNSIGNED
INTEGER
IS.

“If
you’re
not
a
programmer,
perhaps
you
don’t
appreciate
what
a
basic
thing
this
is.
An
average
first-semester
computer
science
student
should
be
able
to
explain
this.
The
judge,
with
his
computer
science
background,
certainly
can.
This
is
like
having
someone
who
says
they’re
a
mathematician
not
being
able
to
explain
what
multiplication
is.”

Wright
likes
to
make
himself
out
to
be
a
workaholic.
At
one
point
in
the
trial
he
said
he
has
written
three
patents
so
far
that
week,
during
lunchtimes
—
on
Feb.
13
alone
he
“wrote
two
papers.”
Thankfully,
he
has
given
the
courtroom
a
little
insight
into
what
drives
him
to
work
tirelessly.

“I
keep
being
told
by
other
people
what
I
can
and
cannot
do.
I
keep
being
told
I
am
useless
by
others.
This
is
one
of
the
reasons
I
keep
getting
all
these
degrees,”

he
said
on
the
last
day
of
his
cross-examination.

If
you
were
thinking
that
Satoshi
Nakamoto
created
Bitcoin
in
an
attempt
to
better
the
world,
think
again.
It
turns
out
that
he
actually
had
a
huge
chip
on
his
shoulder
and
an
emptiness
inside.

In
2020,
Wright
published
a
blog
titled

“As
an
Autistic
Savant…”
that
made
the
case
that
he
was
telling
the
truth
about
inventing
Bitcoin
because
he
had
Aspergers
(a
diagnosis
that
was
retired
from
the
Psychiatric
Association’s
Diagnostic
and
Statistical
Manual
of
Mental
Disorders
in
2013).

“Lying
is
not
something
I
do
easily
or
well,
and
my
behavior
is
not
a
mark
of
deception
but
rather
normal
for
autistic
individuals.
I
am
brutally
honest,
but
also
incredibly
precise,”
he
said.

It’d
be
too
much
to
list
every
inconsistency
brought
up
in
the
trial
—
the
main
strategy
of
the
COPA
legal
team
has
been
to
force
Wright
to
account
for
the
hundreds
of
indications
of
forgery
and
manipulation
found
by
a
forensic
evidence
expert
in
emails,
documents
and
computer
files
submitted
into
evidence.

See
also:


Craig
Wright
Cross
Examination
Ends
as
COPA
Trial
Closes
for
Day

But
to
take
just
two
striking
examples
where
he
wasn’t
exactly
“precise”
with
his
language,
at
one
point
Wright
claimed
he
did
not
have
a
Reddit
account
and
has
never
used
the
popular
message
board
site.
Well,

here’s
his
account.

Wright
also
said
he
faked
Satoshi’s
PGP
key,

perhaps
mistakenly.

Relatedly,
Wright

denies
forging
or
plagiarizing
any
of
the
documents
submitted
into
evidence.
He
has
blamed
hacks,
faulty
internet
connections
and

a
grand
conspiracy
of
people
trying
to
“frame”
him
as
a
liar
for
some
of
the
inconsistencies
brought
—
like

metadata
that
shows
documents
pertaining
to
the
creation
of
Bitcoin
were
made
using
Word
2015.

See
also:


Craig
Wright
Blasts
‘Experts’
Who
‘Cannot
Verify
Their
Work’

On
the
opening
day
of
the
case,
Judge
Mellor
acknowledged
the
allegations
of
forged
documents
and
told
Wright
he
“should
consider
himself
extremely
lucky”
to
argue
his
case,
given
the
circumstances.

When
asked
by
Mellor
on
Wednesday
to
produce
a
single
document
related
to
early
Bitcoin
files
that
doesn’t
show
signs
of
tampering,
Wright
said
they
would
be
unavailable.
Plus,
he
argued,
it
couldn’t
possibly
be
him
manipulating
the
documents,
because
if
it
were,
he

wouldn’t
have
gotten
caught.