In the latest dramatic turn of events in the Kleiman v Wright lawsuit, Craig Wright has claimed attorney client privilege over 11,000 documents, from over a dozen companies he was formerly involved with. Wright has also claimed that the infamous “Bonded Courier” was an attorney, and so therefore his communications are privileged, and cannot be shared.
The Plot Thickens
The latest update in the Craig Wright vs Ira Kleiman lawsuit is a plot twist straight out of Matlock or Law and Order. Craig’s history of legal theatrics is only becoming a more tangled, and complex web of obfuscation.
Kleiman v Wright – Latest Filing
“An adversary who submits false declarations, offers contradictory perjurious testimony under oath, and submits false documents that even his own counsel are forced to disavow…”
Must read again.https://t.co/zDkQaVBg75 pic.twitter.com/vmso6bg494
— Arthur van Pelt – Dragon Industries (@MyLegacyKit) February 3, 2020
In this last release of information regarding the case, Craig Wright has tried to assert attorney-client privilege over documents from more than a dozen companies in which he was involved. The court has requested many documents from these companies as a way to verify some of Craig’s outlandish claims.
Craig has tried to claim that over 11,000 documents are protected by attorney-client privilege, when it suits him, and then simultaneously tried to claim he has no control over the companies and cannot access the documents, when it does not. He is using the claim of privilege as both ‘a shield and a sword’, depending on the circumstances, as the latest motion puts it.
Out of the companies Mr. Wright has claimed privilege for, all are dissolved except nChain and two others, so Wright’s claim of privilege is invalid according to existing case law. Attorney-client privilege can extend after death for a human being, but not for a legal person, which no longer exists, like a dissolved corporation.
Bonded Courier Conversations Cannot be Disclosed, Craig Wright Says
Perhaps the most absurd turn of events is Mr. Wright’s claim that the infamous Bonded Courier who was supposed to provide him with the private keys for Satoshi’s Bitcoin, is actually also an attorney, and is therefore protected under attorney client privilege. This renders the alleged attorney unable to provide more information about the courier, or the circumstances surrounding the elusive private keys.
“Craig has claimed that the bonded courier is an attorney and his communications are privileged.”
pic.twitter.com/uKnyZalhek
— Arthur van Pelt – Dragon Industries (@MyLegacyKit) February 3, 2020
How much longer can this lawsuit last?
This outlandish claim about the Bonded Courier also being an attorney would not be the first time Craig may have lied about owning private Bitcoin keys to a substantial amount of Bitcoin.
In a prior document that he filed in court, he claimed that he owned the private keys to wallet:
16cou7Ht6WjTzuFyDBnht9hmvXytg6XdVT, which was owned by an anonymous Bitcoin Whale.
Much to Craig’s surprise, the anonymous owner of that wallet address signed a message with the private key that said “Address 16cou7Ht6WjTzuFyDBnht9hmvXytg6XdVT does not belong to Satoshi or to Craig Wright. Craig is a liar and a fraud.”
Mr. Wright initially claimed that the Bonded Courier would arrive January 1st, 2020 with the private keys held in the Tulip Trust, and that he would then have access to Satoshi’s coins.
When the first of January finally rolled around, he presented a list of 16,000 addresses to the court and claimed the courier brought him a list of addresses – not the private keys themselves.
Many of the documents Craig has provided the court have been discredited, or proven to be forgeries. He has perjured himself with his testimony and otherwise acted belligerently in court. It is uncertain how much longer the judge will tolerate his lack of cooperation and lack of good faith.
What do you think of Craig Wright’s latest court drama? Let us know in the comments!
Images via Shutterstock, Twitter @MyLegacyKit @ The post appeared first on Bitcoinist.com.
Bitcoinist.com is author of this content, TheBitcoinNews.com is is not responsible for the content of external sites.
Our Social Networks: Facebook Instagram Pinterest Reddit Telegram Twitter Youtube
