Topic: Hodlonaut Trial - page 9. (Read 4198 times)

So Hodlonaut's team have now finished their closing statement, and CSW's team is giving theirs. Some absolute howlers coming out of CSW's team today:

You don't say!?

Expects the court to believe there is no link at all between CSW And Calvin Ayre in relation to doxing individuals? Lol. I'll just leave this here: https://nitter.it/CalvinAyre/status/1115913884823707649

---

Today is the last day. I'm not sure if we will get a judgement today, or if the judge will take some time to deliberate first. Anyone know?

frivolous/SLAPP lawsuits are a nuisance and many jurisdictions have made processes to quash them before they even get a hearing..
(when making a claim you have to atleast show some basic evidence that something actually happened/is in dispute)
but CSW moved to a jurisdiction where SLAPP lawsuits are still heard if they meet a minimal standard.

most civil cases are not things with any big punishments(no prison for loser). they are just cases where there is a dispute between 2 parties and they want a unbiased mediator to judge on which side should fairly win.. where basically if you have the money to pay the mediator(court fees) you get your chance in court

there are silly other things like. if the opposition simply does not turn up, or doesnt want to defend themselves. the court deems that there is no defence and so the party that did turn up wins by default

yes its not the best system and yes there should be many more processes in place where it stops people making random fictitious claims..

but.. if there is evidence shown upfront where someone has insulted someone else and the claimer says they were hurt.. then it passes the most basic bar of being atleast worthy of hearing

where as if CSW said some random person defamed him but couldnt even show a real tweet of that insult. then it wont be heard.
this is why CSW is not making a court claim about satoshi. but doing the defamation claims, and then during the defamation claim, then adding in his pinches of salt to try claiming to be satoshi on record with silly non-proofs. hoping a defamation win becomes proof of satoshi win

Wright’s Satoshi Proofs ‘Not Credible’ and a ‘Farce,’ Hodlonaut Lawyers Say
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/09/19/craig-wrights-satoshi-proofs-not-credible-and-a-farce-hodlonaut-lawyers-say/

Claims by Australian computer scientist Craig Wright to be the founder of Bitcoin were dismissed as “not credible” and a “farce” by lawyers for Twitter personality Hodlonaut, otherwise known as Magnus Granath, in closing arguments offered in Oslo’s District Court Monday.
...
DPA’s findings were “consistent … with what KPMG found in their report,” van Schijndel told District Court Judge Helen Engebrigtsen. “This would include the findings in regard to the fonts.”
That was enough for Ørjan Salvesen Haukaas, Granath’s lawyer, to conclude a pattern of misrepresentation by Wright.
“This document has been manipulated. There can be no doubt about that,” said Haukaas. “This isn’t something that happens if you move it from Windows to Linux … it’s something that happens when you use a text editor and you change the text.”
“The fact that these documents were forged wasn’t even contested by Wright in his statement” to the court, Haukaas said.

  ...  

Legal noob question - why did this case and previous CWS cases went to court, couldn't the judge recognize them as legal trolling and dismiss them. And if the judge didn't understand the technical nuances, couldn't they ask someone who did. To me it looks like a symptom of a broken legal system, and it's clearly against the spirit of the law when a person with a strong reputation of a scammer is able to bring people who expose them to court and make them spend money on defense.

if a ceramic pot was smashed a years ago, then stepped on hundreds of times over years until its dust.. you cant then blame person number 20,000 who has annoyed you for repeating the pot is damaged, for said damage

hodlenaut comments were not just personal lies hodlonaut made up to harm someone. his thoughts are based on information that the community already knew and he simply ensured other people new it too, to save newbie people falling for scams.... hodlonaut did not create anything damaging. thus didnt cause any damage that didnt already exist

---

though CSW doesnt care win or lose.. its not the game he is ultimately playing..
for hodlonaut the case is going hodlonaut way

though CSW says he wants to use future courts as proof of identity..
to  prove he has a credible reputation worth protecting.. ..
not proving it means he has no credible reputation NOW ... thus nothing to protect or get damaged

 defamation/insults/call outs that already occured are not about maybe one day someone will prove something.. its about what information is and was available now and in the past to support someone opinion now and in the past...
and how real/factual/credible that info is to prove/disprove identity and create a reputation(good or bad) that needs protecting(of/from) when the insults occured.
yet there is enough proof of the bad non existant rep. that the stuff pretending to be of good rep has been debunked, proved as lies and shown as forgeries and counterfeit. thus the fails of CSW past is a good enough reason to call him out on his failures.

his reputation has been pre-damaged for decades, he has been sued by former employers, colleges have discredited his involvement, old investors in his "it security" scams have discredited him, Australian tax office have called him out on his crap..

thus general opinion of the community has been that CSW was already a sham/fake/con artist. far longer than hodleonauts comments.

Tell him I'm always available for reposting content he wants to share there.

It's good that Reddit doesn't require phone numbers. I can generate an unlimited of Proton and Tutanota addresses (provided I delete some first).

And then someone complains that this forum is not good enough when it comes to freedom of expression, which unlike the mentioned platform is some kind of futuristic democracy. In my opinion, it is even too tolerated when it comes to various BSV shills or those who claim to be Satoshi without any evidence.

---

I want to believe that the Norwegian court will look at all the evidence and rule in favor of Hodlonaut, and the only thing that worries me is how well the court will be able to understand the evidence presented, because it is not something they have encountered before.

Looks like bitnorbert agrees with my statement above about CSW's team failing by calling experts who agree with Hodlonaut:

Obviously I'm only reading things through the filter of Twitter here, but it does seem like this should go in favor of Hodlonaut.

---

In other news, BSV shills have succeeded in getting Greg Maxwell banned from Reddit for posting some of CSW's lies and forgeries from the trial: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/xi8f1q/is_nullc_banned_from_reddit/

Reddit is such a trash platform.

Yes. It means that if the judge has any sort of understanding about the case, Hodlnaut will be the winner. I think it’s been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that CSW has falsified documents in an attempt to prove he was satoshi and is now telling the court to take people’s word for it. If this works for CSW, I will also be calling myself satoshi and forking the chain to unlock his coins for myself. Anyone who is willing to state that I am satoshi can have a cut.

nothing.. CSW requested day off to organise some lawyers as some not available tomorrow

I'm not good at deciphering lawyer-speak. Does this mean Hodlonaut is winning or not?

Looks like the trial is finished for today, and will be back on Wednesday. I'm not sure what is happening tomorrow.

By the looks of the tweets, Hodlonaut's team have started with a very good closing statement. I believe there will be more from them on Wednesday. For example:

Also worth pointing out that CSW claimed he shared early drafts of the whitepaper with a number of people last week, including Dustin Trammell: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zkweFcpQMs&t=3985s
Dustin Trammell has today made a post calling that out as yet another complete lie from CSW: https://blog.dustintrammell.com/faketoshi-craig-wright-lies-exposed/

theology
the study of how to create a cult of believers..
.. (sarcasm -> ) i wonder why he would see a need to study this?

digital forensics
the study of how digital files can be edited, manipulated..
.. (sarcasm -> ) i wonder why he would see a need to study this?

Craig Wright the big PhD of theology which could as well be a PhD of Voodoo is changing dates on files submitted by someone else to make it look like he did it. What a lowlife.

I bet that idiot wanted a PhD to look smarter but all real sciences were too difficult for him so he went for the one where you can bullshit the most and nobody will be able to say if it's real or not.

Then he went to the Internet and tried to push his bullshit there but it's not that easy when you have archives, screenshots and databases.

All the CoinGeek videos are simply vlogs from well known a CoinGeek contributor and BSV shill. They contain zero footage from inside the court room. Perhaps this is deliberate given how terrible CSW comes across in all the clips we we have been getting from Bitcoin Magazine.

Looks like so far today there has simply been testimony and questioning of other cybersecurity firms regarding the KPMG reports. Despite these firms being called by CSW's team to cast doubt on the KPMG analysis, it seems both were unable to do so and largely agreed with the KPMG findings, only able to offer small criticisms around the edges and not against any of the main findings - i.e. that most of the documents CSW submitted were fraudulent. Seems like quite the fail on the part of CSW and his team today.

Apparently all that is left is closing statements. Would be great to get full videos of these, if anyone from Bitcoin Magazine is reading!

Along with Bitcoin Magazine, someone else is putting youtube videos up to cover the trial.  Unfortunately, it's coingeek.  I won't click on them, but no doubt they're putting their "unique" slant on things.  Some of the videos are even titled "Satoshi Trial", so already it's a pack of lies before anyone has even seen it.

One thing that can be clicked on is the three little vertical dots, which brings up a menu allowing you to report videos for being misleading.  It would be a shame if everyone here on the forum were to click it.   

You know what to do.

Unfortunately Bitcoin Magazine don't seem to be releasing the unedited footage from Friday, so we can only go on the tweets provided, but I've been rereading them and they are absolutely laughable.

For example:
https://nitter.it/wizsecurity/status/1570773425102397443#m
https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570765810863575040#m
CSW submitted what he is claiming is pre-release bitcoin source code, but this pre-release bitcoin source code includes a bug fix which was made in version 0.1.0 following a report made by Hal Finney. So to believe CSW you have to believe he introduced the bug, then fixed it, then re-introduced it, then waited on Hal to make his report, and then fixed it again. Lol.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570769461954879490#m
https://nitter.it/wizsecurity/status/1570773434904485893#m
CSW's submitted pre-release .exe file has an identical checksum to the first public release version. The problem here of course is that while the checksum is valid for the first public version, it is invalid for CSW's pre-release version. This shows that his pre-release version was created simply by taking the first public version and changing a few minor things, i.e. a barn door forgery.

https://nitter.it/wizsecurity/status/1570773441061748741#m
Absolute lol. He tried to make it look older simply by changing the version number in the readme file.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570766382048096260#m
https://nitter.it/wizsecurity/status/1570942661959491584#m
And he included a reference to compressed public keys, which weren't used for another 4 years.

So he has obviously submitted forgeries, but what I find hilarious is just how bad these forgeries are. Referencing things which didn't exist at the time, doing something as simple as just changing the version number, apparently completely oblivious to the existence of checksums. This is the technical equivalent of using white-out on a date and writing an older date on top and thinking no one will notice. You are telling me the best forgery the inventor of bitcoin can muster up is changing the version number in a .txt file? Lmao.

It's difficult because the guy is clearly desperate for attention and it feels wrong to give him more.  But people should be aware of the network of reprehensible scum who support the figurehead of this scam.  We don't want to glorify them, but they should be named and shamed.  

Calvin Ayre and other employees of 'coingeek',
Hakan Yuksel along with any and all employees of 'nchain',
Stefan Matthews, Jodok Wicki and the lesser peons at the (so-called) 'bitcoin association',

All of these people and organisations should all be viewed as culpable accessories.

I can only confirm that I also read that trial will last 7 days, which in my opinion is more than enough to establish the essential facts and for the court to make its decision based on that.

From what I picked up, 2 more days on Monday and Tuesday. Or Tuesday and Wednesday. Surprisingly tricky to find that in writing; I just heard it on Bitcoinmagazine's interview with Mills.