On the fourth day of the COPA v. Craig Wright trial, Wright conceded that many documents he presented to affirm his claim as Satoshi Nakamoto were indeed forged.
Highlighting this development, COPA showcased evidence of anachronisms, including fonts that did not exist when the documents were supposedly created, leading Wright to admit their inauthenticity.
However, Wright shifted blame to several third parties: mistakes by former solicitors, sabotage by ex-employees, hackers compromising his systems, and even the IT environment, which he claimed could autonomously alter documents.
This casts Wright, who professes to be an information security expert, in an unfortunate light.
Reflections on Day 4 of COPA v Wright, the identity issue.
The blame game shifted from Citrix MetaFrame to Ira Kleiman and Atlassian today.
We learnt that Calvin is supposedly *not* funding this case, he only provided a loan (that money is gone, Calvin).
We saw complete 180s… pic.twitter.com/MAERPYcmcI
— Norbert ⚡️ (@bitnorbert) February 8, 2024
Further complicating his position, Wright could not affirm the authenticity of documents related to the so-called Tulip Trust, previously submitted in the U.S. Kleiman litigation.
“I have no idea, and I cannot actually vouch for anything being completely real,” Wright said, inadvertently bolstering COPA’s argument.
Yesterday, Wright had a surprisingly positive day at the trial, as he caused some concerns for COPA when he comprehensively explained Bitcoin’s network theory and presented a 2008 document citing Bitcoin Cash, which wasn’t launched until 2017.
However, the court is aware that as an expert computer engineer, Wright has the technical capabilities to alter metadata. The defendant acknowledged showing his university students how to change the metadata of documents.
The trial is set to run until mid-March as the crypto community frustratingly waits to see whether the court rules out Wright’s long-winded claim of being Bitcoin’s originator.
