Granath v Wright Day 3: Craig Wright and Magnus Granath take the floor

After a couple of days of relatively pedestrian opening for the Granath v Wright trial, both the plaintiff (Magnus Granath) and the defendant (Dr. Craig Wright) took sides on a revealing third day in Oslo.

Granath was the first to go up. So far during the trial, everything Granath has heard has come through the tweets at the center of the case, which were extensively covered yesterday by Dr. Wright’s attorney’s opening statement. On Wednesday, he confronted her statements online and doubled the opinions expressed within them. Although he has claimed that he is not interested in Satoshi’s identity, he has stated that the tweets represent opinions that he really holds, even though he admits they were emotional responses.

The examination was revealing. Halvor Manshaus, acting for Dr. Wright, asked Granath about the absence of evidence within the tweets to justify the names he was calling Dr. Wright. Granath flatly agreed, admitting that she had made no attempt to provide him with the basis of him. He said he was claiming the claims as truth because that was simply the consensus in his “environment” of him. When the judge asked him what that environment was, he replied that it was “people who believe that BTC is Bitcoin”.

In other words, Granath doesn’t need to justify any of his claims, because his audience, the BTC crowd, doesn’t need to read it. Them already know that Dr. Wright is a fraud, according to Hodlonaut. It was a tough time for Granath, considering that his case hinges on proving that he has a factual basis for his statements and that part of his justification (on paper) is that he is doing some sort of public news service.

The same disconnect between Granath’s case on paper and reality repeated when he was asked about a tweet claiming “appreciation and gratitude for Bitcoin’s rabid and toxic maximalists.” He argued this in court, saying that the attitude of the so-called BTC maximalists is that there is Bitcoin and then there are “shitcons” and that instead of getting mad at being toxic, the maximalists wear it as a badge of honor.

In other words, this speech is simply a fact in his online tribe and victims like Dr. Wright should accept it.

Perhaps the most ironic moment in the trial so far came when the judge asked Granath why being called a “crypto troll” – as he complained about being called Granath – was worse than being called a cheater, as Dr. Wright. He said he doesn’t think he is, saying instead that what he finds the worst is to be made public against his will, exposing him to personal attacks from online detractors.

Which is, of course, exactly what happened to Dr. Wright when he was drugged by Wired and Gizmodo in 2015, an event that led Granath’s anonymous Twitter account on a crash course with Dr. Wright, a private citizen looking for. to get on with his life’s work. Granath didn’t seem to notice the role he had played in exposing Dr. Wright to the same attacks (and worse) he complains about.

The second half of the day saw Dr. Wright enter the stand. Like Granath, it was the first time we have heard of Dr. Wright during the trial so far. This meant that the court was treated to the fullest extent of the impact the Granath campaign had had on Dr. Wright.

It was a difficult listening. Wright said that after the Granath attacks began, he received a deluge of abuse that included personal messages sent containing graphic and racist threats aimed at his wife and daughter. He talked about how he was bullied in high school due to him having autism about him: “That’s it,” he said, referring to Granath’s tweets. “He is a person who encourages other bullies to harass people on the Internet. People commit suicide. People like this are trying to force others to submit ”.

This was compounded by the fact that the attacks came from a pseudonymous Twitter account, he says. Twitter’s refusal to act didn’t help.

But Dr. Wright’s testimony was not entirely bleak. Halvor Manshaus asked Dr. Wright to explain the evidence showing that the Bitcoin white paper came from him. This included the minutes of the BDO meeting that appeared in Kleiman, which records a meeting Dr. Wright had with his superiors at BDO in which he pitched the Bitcoin idea in hopes that the company would fund it. But the court was also shown a document consisting of dozens of pages of handwritten notes dated August 2007: the notes are essentially a primitive version of the Bitcoin white paper.

Despite this, much of Dr. Wright’s examination was still spent on why Dr. Wright cannot simply prove his identity using Satoshi’s keys. Dr. Wright explained, as he has done in many contexts, that keys do not prove identity, just as possession of car keys does not prove your ownership of the car. Proving identity is much more complicated, as Dr. Wright is proving by producing a collection of evidence even from those who can personally attest to his Bitcoin authorship. He signed for Gavin Andresen privately – a signature Gavin still claims was authentic – and soon after he destroyed the units on which the keys were kept for the demonstration.

However, says Dr. Wright, people want to take “the easy way out”: they want simple proof that Dr. Wright is Satoshi, one that requires no active thinking or commitment. Those people, it seems, will forever be disappointed.

The trial continues tomorrow at 9:00 CET in Norway.

Watch Granath vs Wright Satoshi Norway Trial Coverage Livestream Day 3:

width = “562” height = “315” frameborder = “0” allowfullscreen = “allowfullscreen”>

New to Bitcoin? Check out CoinGeek Bitcoin for beginners section, the ultimate resource guide to learn more about Bitcoin, as originally intended by Satoshi Nakamoto, and blockchain.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: