Velvel Freedman, lawyer of Kleiman: Craig Wright’s statements in court “lacked credibility” and “trust documents are forgeries”
On Dec 16, according to new court filings from the Kleiman v. Wright case, the plaintiffs have reacted to Wright’s objections against the magistrate’s court order. Velvel Freedman, lawyer of Kleiman said that Craig’s statements in court “lacked credibility”, changing his constant story, showing falsehood. Moreover, Freedman claims Wright’s “trust documents are forgeries”.
Wright tried to protest to Judge Reinhart’s order
From Feb 2018, Craig Wright, the self-proclaimed Bitcoin inventor, has defended himself before the court against the Kleiman family. The lawsuit began because Kleiman real estate believes that Wright manipulated BTC assets and the now-deceased intellectual property of David Kleiman. This is one of the highest filed in the United States as it involves billions of dollars of BTC stored ostentatiously in a blind trust.
After months of trial, protest, and court orders, the Kleiman estate submitted a new motion against Wright’s opposition to Judge Reinhart’s, as the recent court order. Before that, on August 26, Wright was asked by the Southern District Court of Florida to distributing half of his holdings of BTC and his intellectual property assets from prior to 2014.
At first, Wright and his legal team came up with a non-binding settlement, but eventually, fell through. After the settlement was broke down, Wright tried to protest to Judge Reinhart’s order, declared a lack of authority. In the filing filed Tuesday, Velvel Freedman noted that Wright believes he was unfairly treated, but Freedman emphasized that Wright’s problem in court stemmed from “his own behavior”.
Freedman claimed: “Craig is not the victim here. In contrast, as Judge Reinhart detected, Craig’s behavior in this litigation antithetical to the administration of justice and no lesser sanction would suffice”. Furthermore, he also affirmed that the record fully supports Judge Reinhart’s findings and remedies, while the order is absolutely reasonable for the severity of Craig’s crimes.
Indeed, Kleiman’s lawyer continued, Craig refused the orders, far from calling into question its correctness, proving that he is recalcitrant, and – given the opportunity – to execute in the same action that led to the order in the first place. In fact, just hours after Judge Reinhart read the order into the file, Craig walked out of the court and took an interview which he admitted that he lied to the court, especially, next day, he gave an interview, calling Judge Reinhart a ‘silly judge’.
Lawyer Velvel Freedman said Wright did an interview with Modern Consensus columnist Brendan Sullivan after the court order. Exhibit 3 filed on Dec16, 2019.
A fanciful about ‘encrypted file’ and self-conflicting story
After that, Freedman said that the petitioner tried to use the discovery process to determine if BTC was mined as part of a partnership between Wright and Kleiman. Of course, Wright objected, on June 11 this year, Craig first told the court that it was impossible to give plaintiffs a list of his BTC holdings because he did not have the necessary information to access it.
Reinhart then let Wright the opportunity to explain why he could not access the fund, and to carry that burden, Craig told (sworn) a fanciful story about a mysterious ‘encrypted file’ held in a trust. It did not only do this story contradict the previous oath and his motion papers, but the story itself was also self-conflicting, according to the plaintiffs’ filing revealed.
Moreover, in support of his story, Craig came up with documents he swore was ‘authentic to prove that‘ encrypted and trusted files exist. The plaintiffs have revealed these documents to be fake.
Excerpt from Exhibit 3 filed on December 16, 2019.
The move against Wright’s recent objection underlines the time when Wright faced evidence indicated that some documents were fabricated or altered and he “became extremely defensive”. More clearly, Wright tried to “sideline questioning” and made vague remarks about his system being hacked and others having access to his computer. Additionally, Wright vehemently stated there were no public addresses in the BTC system, and “public addresses don’t exist”. The Kleiman attorney says that this absurdity is like saying: “How do unicorns relate to this Court?”.
“Craig was sanctioned harshly, but fairly”
After 29 pages of debate, Freedman concluded that the court must face a man who “has no respect” the authority of the court, or for the fair administration of justice. Complainants wholeheartedly believe that Wright has lied in the whole lawsuit and now trying to hide behind a “blanket of due process”.
Moreover, he added, “Craig was sanctioned harshly, but fairly — Craig’s objections should be overruled in their entirety”. Also according to the court docket, on December 18 in West Palm Beach court will hold a discovery hearing conference, and lawsuit participants can attend via telephone by using the court’s conference call system.
- India’s Parliament Member: The Adoption Of Cryptocurrency Is Unavoidable
- Switzerland Will Stand Outside The Race To Release CBDC Copper From Governments