Maybe I am being a bit overly picky about the use of "Dr" or any need to agree to describing such status, even if some of the articles and even the judge had chosen to use such a title when describing CSW in ruling against him. Sometimes courts will go out of their way to make sure that they do not appear bias, which might partly explain the court's use of the Dr title for CSW.
i am from an Arabic origin. In Arab culture, we use some qualities that seem highly appreciated, in order to belittle a person and perhaps despise him as well. It does not mean, for example, that we might say to someone, “How smart you are,” when the meaning is to mock his stupidity. I mean, I used the adjective “doctor” as a sarcasm and not because he really deserves that adjective. I hope the idea is clear now
I wonder what the legal cassation arguments will be to invalidate the ruling after all the detailed evidence presented by the court. I also do not think that the defense team or the court overlooked or forgot any of the details. I do not understand why some people insist on clinging to allegations that have been proven false beyond a reasonable doubt.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is a criminal standard, and so far, these have not been criminal proceedings, so the standard is not as high.. The standard in this Craig Wright (CSW) would be clear and convincing or preponderance of the evidence or some variation that is not quite as high as the criminal standard.
I can understand this to some extent. But I cannot ignore that this fallacy that Dr. Wright worked to market for years has made him a global figure, and even trusted in many circles. These allegations made him one of the richest people in crypto, and there are still those who are willing to risk their savings because they believe these allegations. It is true that everything Dr. Wright did may not rise to the level of a perfect crime, but its consequences were disastrous for many people as well. There is a moral responsibility in any case.
