Topic: Hodlonaut Trial - page 5. (Read 4198 times)
Congrats to Hodlonaut and to the greater Bitcoin community. It’s nice to see the courts get something right. Having all of his costs paid is also a great thing. Considering much of the funds were donated to pay his fees, this has got to feel like a nice gift at the end of a long struggle. I hope this keeps faketoshi from suing devs and others instead of giving him the fuel to continue doing horrible things. This is a big win for us all.
i know the case started with the courts saying it did not want to be involved in proving/disproving "satoshi". where it only wanted to decide on if hodlonaut was the genesis instigator of CSW negative rep.. which is clear he was not. but i am also glad the court also mentioned that CSW us a proven liar and that the evidence still points to that CSW is not satoshi
i bet hodlonaut is currently excited, happy, relieved, exhausted and celebrating. i can imagine him now relieving the dead weight off his shoulders, that was pressing on him for the last 3 years, he deserves a stiff drink and a vacation to finally relax. and bask in the glory
i also hope this result wakes up the CSW fangirls where they start to sue CSW for misled investments, maybe even hope some whistle blow on some CSW criminal scams that can get CSW in criminal court with some proper punishment...
..
anyway hodlonauut deserves the ~$670k of which ~$450k is legal costs plus all the celebrations, congratulations and donations we as a community want to give him.
i bet hodlonaut is currently excited, happy, relieved, exhausted and celebrating. i can imagine him now relieving the dead weight off his shoulders, that was pressing on him for the last 3 years, he deserves a stiff drink and a vacation to finally relax. and bask in the glory
i also hope this result wakes up the CSW fangirls where they start to sue CSW for misled investments, maybe even hope some whistle blow on some CSW criminal scams that can get CSW in criminal court with some proper punishment...
..
anyway hodlonauut deserves the ~$670k of which ~$450k is legal costs plus all the celebrations, congratulations and donations we as a community want to give him.
The man is a proven pathological liar, but does it even make sense to lie that you won the case in court if the verdict is more than clear?
He did so in Florida even after getting a $100 million USD judgement against him (+$49m interest), he claimed won because his opponent didn't prevail on literally every claim they made. I assume he'll do exactly the same in this case. Does it make sense? A *lot* of the media went forward with an uncritical claim that he won (and even that the case proved he was Satoshi!) copied right out of Wright's PR material fraudulently published as "journalism" in coingeek. Here is a translation of the decision: https://files.catbox.moe/x8n18i.pdf
I know that everything is possible, but honestly I was convinced that there would be no other outcome than this - the evidence is more than clear even for someone who is not an expert, in this case a judge in a Norwegian court. Given that Hodlonaut won, does that mean he won't need the funds he collected through the campaign - and what will happen to those funds in that case?
The man is a proven pathological liar, but does it even make sense to lie that you won the case in court if the verdict is more than clear?
Probably also a bunch of gaslighting to allege that he actually won in Norway.
The man is a proven pathological liar, but does it even make sense to lie that you won the case in court if the verdict is more than clear?
Good news. So what happens to Craig now?
He takes more money from his marks and continues using it to fund a campaign of harassment and intimidation against Bitcoin developers and advocates in order to continue to put on a show of attempting to steal Satoshi's coins, same as before. 
Probably also a bunch of gaslighting to allege that he actually won in Norway.
Good news. So what happens to Craig now?
Damn, I cannot wait until 8th of November. Getting exiting already...
Fortunately, you don't have to: https://twitter.com/hodlonaut/status/1583086284792205312Quote
[Hodlonaut] won the case. He is therefore basically entitled to full compensation for his reasonable and necessary legal costs
Quote
The court believes that [Hodlonaut] had sufficient factual grounds to claim that Wright had lied and cheated in his attempt to prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto. At the time of the remarks, there was public discussion about whether Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto or not. In media coverage, the prevailing opinion was that Wright was not Satoshi Nakamoto. The court refers to the previously mentioned articles from Gizmodo (2015), and BBC News The Guardian and GQ Magazine (2016). Both parties have tried to prove that Wright is and is not Satoshi Nakamoto, respectively. The court points out that the evidence brought in the case is not suitable to change the prevailing opinion that Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
The official deadline is November 8th, but we're expecting/hoping it to be announced earlier than that.
The October 7 you may be remembering was only to fill the costs papers.
The October 7 you may be remembering was only to fill the costs papers.
Thanks dude! That's why I was thinking about October, I listened the whole trial, and now I remember that there was this about the costs.
Damn, I cannot wait until 8th of November. Getting exiting already...
When will be the verdict announced?
If I remember correctly it was in the middle of October ( or maybe it was November).
The judge said she will notify the both parties a few days prior, when she is ready, but I can't find any more info about it.
If I remember correctly it was in the middle of October ( or maybe it was November).
The judge said she will notify the both parties a few days prior, when she is ready, but I can't find any more info about it.
The official deadline is November 8th, but we're expecting/hoping it to be announced earlier than that.
The October 7 you may be remembering was only to fill the costs papers.
When will be the verdict announced?
If I remember correctly it was in the middle of October ( or maybe it was November).
The judge said she will notify the both parties a few days prior, when she is ready, but I can't find any more info about it.
If I remember correctly it was in the middle of October ( or maybe it was November).
The judge said she will notify the both parties a few days prior, when she is ready, but I can't find any more info about it.
Particularly ironic given the whole hodlonaut trial is about CSW claiming that hodlonaut's tweets stopped him from attending conferences. 
I wonder how exactly could this happen when he was banned from twitter for a while, unless this happened before he was baned.Maybe he was glued to the screen, reading hodlonaut tweets and writing replies on his own version of social network
Meanwhile I see that hodlonaut was talking with one @MarkEglinton who said he wanted to write an ''objective'' article, but it appears he is long time supporter of CSW and CAyre.
https://nitter.priv.pw/hodlonaut/status/1580554455006605313
That guy's words are worth the value of the text file they are typed in retrospectively hex edited in to.
Fixed that for you. 
CSW includes the following in his reply:
Particularly ironic given the whole hodlonaut trial is about CSW claiming that hodlonaut's tweets stopped him from attending conferences.
Quote
I am not the media whore I am touted to be and I am also not seeking funds. 
I do not want to attend conferences. Nor do I seek affirmation.
I do not want to attend conferences. Nor do I seek affirmation.
Particularly ironic given the whole hodlonaut trial is about CSW claiming that hodlonaut's tweets stopped him from attending conferences.
That guy's words are worth the value of the text file they are typed in.
When was this email written? And why is Gavin still emphasizing that CSW is the bitcoin creator?
This particular email is dated "March 14, 2016 7:27 PM".Interestingly, there is an email from Gavin dated April 6, 2016, which asks for the following from the signing session:
Quote
I just spent some time thinking about what I'd like to get out of the meetings tomorrow. I'll be bringing my laptop and a brand-new USB stick, I'd like to see some or all of the following copied onto it so I can verify on my laptop:
PGP-signed message with the well-known key containing tomorrow's date and the phrase "So it goes" (I'm a Kurt Vonnegut fan)
One or more messages signed using keys from early bitcoin blocks (using bitcoind signmessage/verifymessage functionality)
Never-before-published private emails or forum posts to or from me, from 2010
PGP-signed message with the well-known key containing tomorrow's date and the phrase "So it goes" (I'm a Kurt Vonnegut fan)
One or more messages signed using keys from early bitcoin blocks (using bitcoind signmessage/verifymessage functionality)
Never-before-published private emails or forum posts to or from me, from 2010
Of course, we now know that Gavin did not receive anything even close to any of those things. CSW includes the following in his reply:
Quote
I am not the media whore I am touted to be and I am also not seeking funds.
I do not want to attend conferences. Nor do I seek affirmation.
I do not want to attend conferences. Nor do I seek affirmation.
Particularly ironic given the whole hodlonaut trial is about CSW claiming that hodlonaut's tweets stopped him from attending conferences.
Yes, I was thinking about this on the drive home from work today. This case could be the one
which starts the crumbling of CSW's house of lies and so could be an extremely important case.
If the court rightfully find that all CSW's submitted forgeries are, well, forgeries, then it will certainly be interesting when it comes to future cases. Does he resubmit all his provably false documents? Does he come up with new forgeries instead? Does he just submit nothing at all?which starts the crumbling of CSW's house of lies and so could be an extremely important case.
Exactly. Somebody's gotta take down this guy's (Wright) claims for good before he becomes a crypto Trump and influences an untold number of people.
the whole tone of the NDA appears as if Andressen had either not sought counsel or he just totally got railroaded like a newb in terms of the acceptability of the terms contained in the NDA.
If you open the file "Bilag 15" from the pack that Greg has rehosted above, you can see the emails from Andresen pertaining to the signing session. In particular page 5, an email from Jon Matonis to Gavin Andresen, includes the following quote (emphasis mine):Quote
Unfortunately, I was unable to convince the creator to re-send the two signed emails that you requested because there is a strong desire to NOT have any "non-physical-presence" proof floating around in the world prior to formal announcement. I have never asked you for anything before, so you are just going to have to trust me on this and what I personally witnessed with the block #1 sign and verify.
When was this email written? And why is Gavin still emphasizing that CSW is the bitcoin creator?
If the court rightfully find that all CSW's submitted forgeries are, well, forgeries, then it will certainly be interesting when it comes to future cases. Does he resubmit all his provably false documents? Does he come up with new forgeries instead? Does he just submit nothing at all?
The last thing I remember about the case is when his lawyers said that he accidentally stomped on the hard drives and I was literally like in tears of laugh that what they are presenting in the court for proving themselves right in the court.But as you say about forge documents then we all know what else he have to prove to the people? His whole idea is damn forge to be orginal Satoshi with all those fake claims and fake documents and now moving on to the verge of losing his savings as well in hope to earn those coins which never belonged to him.The one who cannot sign a transaction which is simple scenario for bitcoiners to prove the ownership is fighting in courts.But we all know how judicial system can be well manipulated through financial powers and even forge documents tell the truth then but as the case needs to be presented in fair manner and Hodlonaut will definitely be on winning side on this one and clown will get nothing but empty pockets.
But the court could decide that to win on truth Holdo would have to *prove* Wright wasn't Satoshi and that he didn't achieve that.
What a travesty that would be, that for some reason the burden of negative proof would be on Hodlonaut, rather than burden of proof being on CSW (one which he has spectacularly failed). If CSW's claim is the tweets defamed him because he is Satoshi, then the burden of proof should lie firmly on his shoulders to prove this is the case. Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.Yes, I was thinking about this on the drive home from work today. This case could be the one
which starts the crumbling of CSW's house of lies and so could be an extremely important case.
If the court rightfully find that all CSW's submitted forgeries are, well, forgeries, then it will certainly be interesting when it comes to future cases. Does he resubmit all his provably false documents? Does he come up with new forgeries instead? Does he just submit nothing at all? which starts the crumbling of CSW's house of lies and so could be an extremely important case.
That's a bit worrying that the court could see CSW as actually being Satoshi, especially
given all the evidence by KPMG of all the fakery.
Oh I don't think that is a serious concern. But the court could decide that to win on truth Holdo would have to *prove* Wright wasn't Satoshi and that he didn't achieve that.given all the evidence by KPMG of all the fakery.
You see how that's different, right?
like take craig out of it for a minute. Would a court conclude that it was proven I was Satoshi? Obviously not. Would a court conclude that it was proven that I wasn't Satoshi? Also obviously not.
Hodlo makes the case that to win on not-satoshiness he only needs to show that it's more likely than not that Wright isn't Satoshi. If the court agrees with that standard then he will probably win on that basis. But the court might decide that he needed to prove it by a higher standard, which it might decide that he hadn't met. I think he actually met a very high level of proof but the court might not agree -- it's difficult to prove anything absolutely without the power of a criminal investigation: The only evidence Hodlo got was what Wright provided, he didn't get to search Wright's home or computers, didn't get his email records, etc.
But I think strategically Hodlo really doesn't want the narrow win, he presumably wants a win that says "Wright wouldn't be able to convince the court that he was satoshi and so couldn't prevail in a defamation claim"
If that's going to happen, maybe that could be referenced/used in future trials CSW is/will be involved in, saving people's time and money. From that I know, that could be possible, but I don't know if cross-border.
Yes, I was thinking about this on the drive home from work today. This case could be the one
which starts the crumbling of CSW's house of lies and so could be an extremely important case.
snip
It seems Wright's side views this as an opening, essentially going for a "it doesn't matter how fraudulent wright looks now, at the time the statements weren't justified" although I don't see how that works out for him if the courts impression is that he's more likely than not actually Satoshi-- which I think is extremely likely.
snip
It seems Wright's side views this as an opening, essentially going for a "it doesn't matter how fraudulent wright looks now, at the time the statements weren't justified" although I don't see how that works out for him if the courts impression is that he's more likely than not actually Satoshi-- which I think is extremely likely.
snip
That's a bit worrying that the court could see CSW as actually being Satoshi, especially
given all the evidence by KPMG of all the fakery.
But I think strategically Hodlo really doesn't want the narrow win, he presumably wants a win that says "Wright wouldn't be able to convince the court that he was satoshi and so couldn't prevail in a defamation claim"
If that's going to happen, maybe that could be referenced/used in future trials CSW is/will be involved in, saving people's time and money. From that I know, that could be possible, but I don't know if cross-border.
Jump to: