Judge orders Peter McCormack to pay £ 1 in damages to Craig Wright. Yes, £ 1

Did this UK judge rule Craig Wright’s reputation worth £ 1? Be the … judge. The “Judgment approved by the High Court”Reads like a novel. It contains many benefits, many outs and many what-have-yous. It conveniently summarizes everything that happened and what brought us and Peter McCormack here. The story is fascinating and paints a clear picture of who Craig Wright is and who he isn’t. But let’s leave it to the judge’s handwriting to paint.

For example, Wright’s financier Calvin Ayre prepared the bait and McCormack fell in love with it. According to the document, Ayre tweeted:

“Craig and I are polishing our muskets at today’s Troll Hunting meeting in London. #CraigisSatoshi. ”

12 Mr. McCormack replied at 1:47 pm on April 10, 2019 (Publication 2): “Craig Wright is not Satohis! [sic] When am I reported? “

And then he continued to antagonize Ayre until he got her wish and was sued. The narrative is long and intricate, and this is not the place to go into the merits. Bitcoinist has already published a story when McCormack’s team responded to the lawsuitand another when the process started a couple of months ago. And, of course, you can also read the new document.

Anyway, just to give you a taste …

Quick snapshot of the judge’s results

At first, the judge appears to be sympathetic to McCormack.

“There are other passages, in which Mr. McCormack makes further statements in the same effect as the lamented words. You don’t need to set them all here. In my opinion, the publication, as a whole, assumes the meaning claimed by Mr. McCormack, or that there were reasonable grounds to question or investigate whether the plaintiff had fraudulently claimed to be Satoshi.

But, as the story goes on, things change. Which doesn’t mean she sympathizes with Craig Wright. For example, regarding one of the multiple lectures Wright would not be invited to due to McCormack’s tweets, the judge found:

“Prof. Darwazeh is a high-ranking academic. His written and documentary evidence establishes that: the first Hanoi conference operated a rigorous blind peer review system; Dr. Wright presented a paper; he was reviewed and rejected on merit; and the refusal was communicated to Dr. Wright.

This brings us to …

Did McCormack cause “serious damage” to Craigh Wright?

First, the judge sets the rules:

“I have considered the three bases on which Dr Wright claimed that the Publications caused or could have caused serious damage to his reputation in England and Wales: the inherent gravity of the charge carried by each tweet; the significant scope of the publication; and evidence of actual damage “.

So, he clarifies exactly how McCormack may have damaged Craig Wright’s reputation:

“The fact that he was willing to express his views so brazenly in response to threats of libel prosecution probably led those who read them more, not less, to believe it.”

Eventually, he sides with Wright. “I find it more likely that each of the Publications has caused serious damage to Dr. Wright’s reputation,” says the judge. “I clarify, however, that my conclusion on the matter of serious harm is in no way based on Dr. Wright’s oral evidence regarding the effect on his reputation in academic or other circles,” he explains.

BSVUSD Price Chart - TradingView

BSV price chart on Bitfinex | Source: BSV/USD on TradingView.com

Was there any damage?

This is important. The judge ruled, but the case is not over yet.

“In my opinion, the appropriate course of action is for me to resolve the damage issue first and then invite further comments on whether to grant injunctive or other relief in the light of my findings.”

And this is where the judge begins to turn against Craig Wright. “However, it is also well established that” a person should only be compensated for the damage to the reputation he actually has. ” And he lets readers know that the accuser may not get what he wants. “The deliberately false serious injury case advanced by Dr. Wright up to a few days prior to trial requires in my judgment more than just a reduction in the award of compensation.” The judge elaborates:

“Had it not been for Dr. Wright’s deliberately untrue case of serious harm, more than minimal compensation would have been appropriate, even if the quantum would have been reduced to reflect the fact that Mr. McCormack was pressured to make the claims. that he did and, having felt that Dr. Wright was not a witness to the truth, I would have rejected in its entirety his case concerning the anguish he claims to have suffered.

Hence, Wright’s antics are the reason for the “minimal damages”. For example, “Dr. Wright put forward a deliberately false case of academic conference divestments in his Amended Particulars of Claim and his first testimony.” And, “Dr. Wright’s response to this evidence was to change his case and withdraw significant portions of his previous evidence, while he tried to explain that the errors were unintentional. I have rejected this explanation as false. “

The verdict, Craig Wright gets £ 1

Eventually, the judge ruled that McCormack damaged Wright’s reputation:

“I have found that the Publications have caused serious damage without referring to the previous deliberately false case relating to academic conferences. However, I have the right to take my findings on the previous false case into consideration in the damage assessment. “

But the damages are not what you expect:

“Consequently, I will issue a judgment to Dr. Wright on the claim for the sum of £ 1.”

To such, McCormack responded via Twitter:

“As some of you have now seen, the sentence in my trial against Dr. Craig Wright has now been passed. I want to thank my lawyers for their diligent work on the case. I also want to thank Mr. Justice Chamberlain for this achievement. We are very pleased with his findings. Please note that the process is not complete and therefore I will not comment further on this. Once the whole process is complete, there will be others that I will thank. “

And that’s it for now. Something tells us there is more to come, though. Much more. Stay tuned to Bitcoinist to find out. And if you want to help Peter McCormack “cover the costs of this damage”, here it is a GoFundMe for that.

Featured Image: Peter McCormack screenshot from this video | Charts by TradingView

Bukele, McCormack screenshot from the documentary

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: