As the Kleiman v Wright trial heads on to its third week, it is interesting to see the price of BTC rise to an all-time high of $68,990.90 on November 10 and go down to $65,312.08 on November 13.
Is the price increase naturally caused by the attention being received by Bitcoin during the controversial trial or is it artificially created as a much-needed diversion that would prevent people from understanding the full implications of the Satoshi Nakamoto trial?
There is cause for suspicion as Tether reportedly minted and released $3 billion worth of USDT into the digital currency market. Similar moves have been known to cause price pumps in the past.
What is the Satoshi Nakamoto Trial?
The Satoshi Nakamoto trial has gained the attention of the world outside the Bitcoin ecosystem, as mainstream media has packed the courtroom to cover the fate of the 1.1 million Satoshi coins at stake in the lawsuit. But what exactly is it about really?
Ira Kleiman is the representative of his late brother David Kleiman’s estate and W&K Info Defense Research, LLC, and is acting as the plaintiff in this case. Ira Kleiman is suing Craig Wright for up to half of this 1.1 million Bitcoin belonging to Satoshi Nakamoto.
The plaintiff is alleging that Wright and David Kleiman were partners in the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto who wrote the Bitcoin white paper and that the two were business partners in W&K Info Defense Research, LLC, through which they mined the said coins together.
The defense is arguing that Wright is the sole author of the Bitcoin white paper; although David Kleiman helped in editing it, and that there is no evidence of a business partnership between David Kleiman and Wright when it comes to mining the 1.1 million Satoshi coins, now valued at over $74 billion, but was recorded at an all-time high of over $75 billion on November 10.
A very compelling piece of evidence presented by the plaintiff during the very short second week of the Kleiman v Wright trial was a document stating that David Kleiman had transferred 573,500 Bitcoin to Wright—something the plaintiff is intimating was done with fraudulent intentions.
However, there is no hard evidence to back this claim. And Wright, in his testimony, says he transferred those coins with the knowledge and permission of David Kleiman, because the latter helped the former in safekeeping these assets when Wright was under investigation by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO).
“Dave helped me act as a front, a sham as the ATO called it. So, it looked like he ran all my companies… the Australian Taxation office almost bankrupt me and became the owner of Bitcoin’s IP,” Wright said under oath.
It seems the plaintiff is struggling with its burden of proof due to lack of evidence. and a very glaring fact that cannot be denied is that if David Kleiman was really a partner with Wright in creating Bitcoin as Satoshi Nakamoto and in mining the 1.1 million Satoshi coins, why did he not claim them while he was alive?
David Kleiman was paralyzed in 1995 and was heavily in debt at the time of his death due to a longstanding MRSA infection in April 2013. In the same time period, half of the 1.1 million Bitcoin that he had allegedly mined with Wright was valued at over $100 million.
If David Kleiman thought he had a right to that money, then why did he not attempt to claim it at all? Furthermore, David Kleiman had left a last will and testament, but there was no mention of Bitcoin in it. There is also no evidence of him owning Bitcoin or of anyone knowing he owned Bitcoin or was part of its creation.
If there was any piece of evidence, it may have been deleted when Ira Kleiman decided to reformat and erase all of his computer forensic expert brother’s laptop and hard drives.
And this is the burden that the plaintiff must bear, having to result in attempts at discrediting Wright and painting him as a fraud in order to get the message that Wright was capable of stealing David Kleiman’s Bitcoin. But being capable of stealing does not automatically make one a thief, which then makes the plaintiff’s case weak at best from a logical standpoint.
What are the Implications if Wright Wins the Trial?
Aside from officially being one of the richest men in the world, Wright winning the trial and proving that he alone is Satoshi Nakamoto will have far-reaching implications in the world of cryptocurrency.
For one, there is a huge possibility for the price of BSV (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision), the digital currency that Wright is in full support of due to its commitment to his original vision for Bitcoin, to dramatically increase, as evidenced by its 120% increase after Wright was granted the copyright for the Bitcoin white paper, and for BTC’s price to drop.
For years, Wright has been very vocal about BTC’s abuse of his invention and how it has been distorted from his original vision. And if Wright is legally proven to be Satoshi Nakamoto—the lawsuit is already based on the premise that Wright makes up at least half of the pseudonym—interest in BSV as the real Bitcoin will skyrocket and BTC proponents and advocates would be proven to be wrong in their smear campaign against Wright all these years.
And if the Satoshi coins move, as Wright has previously guaranteed, markets would also move with them. And as this movement will further solidify Wright being Satoshi Nakamoto, it would also strengthen BSV’s position in the market as the real Bitcoin.
Court session will resume Monday, and people are expecting an exciting week ahead.