Wright, chief scientist of nChain and genuinely father of the Bitcoin SV cryptocurrency, has long claimed to be Nakamoto, which would give him possession of the 1.1 million BTC. While virtually no one in the cryptocurrency industry believes his claim, the estate of Wright’s late partner at the time those bitcoins were mined in the project’s early days, Dave Kleiman, does and wants half.
EXCLUSIVE: Cocaine, benzos, booze and a bullet hole—the mysterious, tragic death of the man Craig Wright says helped him create Bitcoin
With a $10 billion lawsuit looming, we asked a medical professional to look at Dave Kleiman’s autopsy in order to shed light on moves by Wright’s legal team to paint his friend and partner as too ill and drugged up to code the first cryptocurrency
Kleiman’s death is at the heart of the $10 billion bitcoin lawsuit that will likely prove once and for all if nChain chief scientist and Bitcoin SV creator Craig Wright is also Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, as he claims. The vast majority of the cryptocurrency industry considers Wright a liar.
Did Craig Wright try to commit suicide with a Japanese katana?
A witness in the ongoing lawsuit over the $10 billion in bitcoin Wright says he mined as Satoshi Nakamoto testified that a failed attempt to prove that claim led to a suicide attempt
Shortly after the failed BBC demonstration that if successful would have proved Craig Wright is Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, software developer Gavin Andreson received an email. “All Stop. Craig has just tried to injure himself and is bleeding badly in the washroom,” it read.
Citing autism, Judge excuses Craig Wright’s pattern of “forgeries”
In a blistering ruling, federal Judge Beth Bloom tore into the self-proclaimed Bitcoin creator’s pattern of misleading statements and actions during the $10 billion case’s pre-trial phase, but again refused to impose sanctions
In a blistering 39-page ruling, federal Judge Beth Bloom outlines a pattern of Craig Wright making allegedly misleading and perjurious statements as well as presenting forged or false evidence, but rules against sanctioning him.. She specifically—and repeatedly—states that his autism is a deciding factor.