Read the series: Week 1 | Week 2
The trial, which involves the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) challenging Wright’s claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto, started on February 5th. Witnesses from Wright’s camp, including Matthews, have been testifying, following Wright’s cross-examination. Craig Wright had a very difficult time on Day 10 but there was nothing to prepare us all for his final day (Day 15) on the stand, where most of the damage was inflicted on his claim. The trial is expected to continue at least until mid-March.
During the third week of the trial, from February 19th to 23rd, 2024, several key developments and themes emerged:
The nChain CEO Train Wreck
The return of witnesses David Bridges, Max Lynam, and Stefan Matthews, after the Oslo trial emphasised their challenge to maintain narrative consistency under cross-examination. Stefan Matthews, a key witness in the Craig Wright trial, faced scrutiny over his previous comment describing the trial as a “train wreck.” During his testimony, Matthews, who co-founded nChain with Wright, clarified that his comment was specifically about Wright’s uncooperative approach to the trial’s strategy and plan, not about Wright’s credibility as the inventor of Bitcoin. He insisted that he did not consider Wright to be a fraud.
Before Matthews took the stand, two other witnesses, David Bridges and Max Lynam, testified via video link. Bridges, the CIO of Qudos Bank, and Lynam, Wright’s cousin, both admitted that key events or conversations that led them to believe Wright was Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, lacked material proof and took place many years ago. Bridges drew parallels between Bitcoin’s technology and an event logging system created by Wright, emphasizing their shared attributes of recording transactions and immutability. However, when asked about the technical specifics of these systems, Bridges admitted he lacked the expertise for a detailed comparison.
Bitcoin Developers Witness Testimonies
In the third week of the COPA vs. Wright trial, testimonies from notable Bitcoin figures Martti Malmi and Adam Back provided compelling insights.
Martti Malmi, one of the early Bitcoin contributors, was the first witness on Day 13 of the trial. His testimony was crucial in differentiating between Craig Wright and Satoshi Nakamoto. Malmi had direct communications with Satoshi Nakamoto through IRC chat and email back in 2009 and attested to these interactions during the trial. His involvement in the early Bitcoin forum on SourceForge, and later BitcoinTalk.org, was highlighted, including how he contributed to the site based on Satoshi’s suggestions. Malmi also clarified the nature of the Bitcoin forum server migration, countering Wright’s claims about communication through the SourceForge code project. He further mentioned conversations with Satoshi about integrating sidechains and adding timestamps within the Bitcoin protocol, reflecting Satoshi’s intention to enhance Bitcoin’s functionality.
Adam Back, a key figure in the cryptocurrency community and an executive at Blockstream, also took the stand. Back is known for introducing HashCash in 1997, a proof-of-work system cited in the Bitcoin White Paper. His testimony included discussions about the initial purpose of HashCash as a method to prevent email spam, later evolving to counter denial-of-service attacks. Back acknowledged the influence of Wei Dai‘s B-Money but couldn’t confirm if Dai had uploaded his paper to the Cypherpunks mailing list. Wright’s team highlighted Back’s association with members of the Cypherpunks group, like Hal Finney and Zooko Wilcox, but Back downplayed these connections. He refuted Wright’s criticism of the Lightning Network, defending it as a solution to Bitcoin’s scaling issues and emphasized Blockstream’s commitment to open-sourcing patents through COPA collaboration.
Zooko Wilcox’s testimony in the COPA vs. Craig Wright trial was a significant part of the proceedings. Wilcox, known for his involvement with ZCash, was brought into the spotlight when Wright claimed that he had sent Bitcoin to Wilcox from Satoshi Nakamoto’s wallet. This claim was a key point of contention during the trial, as it directly related to Wright’s assertion that he is the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto.
During his testimony, Wilcox challenged Wright’s claims. He has been a vocal critic of Wright, openly expressing his skepticism about Wright’s claims of being Satoshi Nakamoto. Wilcox’s past statements have described Wright as someone who does not possess the necessary cryptographic knowledge to have created Bitcoin.
The cross-examination of Craig Wright at the trial revealed several inconsistencies and gaps in his narrative. One notable moment was Wright’s struggle to recall the recipients of early Bitcoin transactions he claimed to have made as Satoshi Nakamoto. This inability to provide specific details about these transactions raised doubts about the authenticity of his claims. Furthermore, the court discussed the alleged transactions to Wilcox, with COPA’s lawyer suggesting that, contrary to Wright’s assertions, Satoshi Nakamoto never transferred Bitcoin to Wilcox.
Overall, Wilcox’s participation in the trial and his previous public statements contributed to the scrutiny of Wright’s claims. The trial, which has been closely followed by the cryptocurrency community, presented a platform where various allegations and claims about the origins of Bitcoin and the identity of its creator were intensely debated.
Technical Inconsistencies and Misunderstandings
During the trial, Craig Wright’s comprehension of Bitcoin’s technical details was intensely scrutinized. His explanations and understanding of elementary Bitcoin concepts and terminology were inconsistent and often incorrect. This aspect was particularly crucial, as one would expect the alleged creator of Bitcoin to demonstrate a comprehensive and precise knowledge of the technology. Wright’s inability to do so raised significant doubts about the legitimacy of his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous figure behind Bitcoin’s creation. This challenge to his technical expertise became a pivotal point in evaluating the credibility of his assertions.
From the Core Developers legal team, Gunning KC (One Essex Court, Macfarlanes LLP) scrutinized Craig Wright’s actions regarding the whitepaper’s Latex files. Wright claimed they were merely copied to his Overleaf account, not created there. Gunning highlighted Wright’s extensive edits to these files, including spacing and formatting changes, allegedly to match the original Bitcoin whitepaper. Wright insisted these were demonstration actions.
However, Gunning presented evidence, including animations (created by the developers), in a pivotal moment of the trial, that suggested these edits closely mimicked the whitepaper’s format. Wright maintained these were part of a demonstration, yet Gunning challenged this, implying Wright’s actions resembled forging the whitepaper. Wright’s responses varied, sometimes agreeing to the actions but framing them as demonstrations for legal teams or documentation, not as attempts to forge the whitepaper.
The evidence from Overleaf was submitted by Craig Wright and his legal team, unbeknown to them, and it contained damning evidence against their claim. A self-inflicted wound that can cost him the trial.
How Wright forged a LaTeX version of the #Bitcoin whitepaper on Overleaf during the end of last year. pic.twitter.com/8rNLkpaVeA
— ᗪIGIᑎᗩᑌT (@digitalnaut) February 23, 2024
Overall, the third week of the trial was marked by intense examination and cross-examination, aimed at dissecting the validity of Wright’s claims and assessing the credibility of his narrative. The developments in this phase of the trial were crucial in shaping the ongoing legal battle over the true identity of Bitcoin’s creator.
Author Profile
- Lucy Walker covers finance, health and beauty since 2014. She has been writing for various online publications.
Latest entries
- April 25, 2025Global EconomicsWhistleblowers Unmask Schwab’s Toxic WEF Secrets
- April 9, 2025Global EconomicsTariff Tensions Drive Market Volatility
- March 18, 2025Global EconomicsRed in Name Only: Labour’s War on the UK Working Class
- March 7, 2025SatoshiCraig Wright Banned from UK Courts with Civil Restraint Order