1. Home
  2. >>
  3. bitcoin
  4. >>
  5. Wright Vs. McCormack, Bitcoin’s test of the year has begun in London

Wright Vs. McCormack, Bitcoin’s test of the year has begun in London



Wright Vs. McCormack, Bitcoin’s test of the year has begun in London


Step aside Heard Vs. Depp, Wright Vs. McCormack is here to grab the world’s attention. In one corner, the only man with the nerve to pretend he is Satoshi Nakamoto, Dr. Craig Wright. On the other, the host and creator of the What Bitcoin Did podcast, Peter McCormack. The setting is London. According to McCormack’s tweets, Dr. Wright is an impostor. The charge is defamation.

Related Reading | Bitcoin Developers Achieve Victory Against Craig Wright, Court Dismisses Lawsuit

Apparently, McCormack significantly damaged Wright’s career with fifteen tweets and one podcast appearance. McCormack does not appear to deny the defamatory nature of his tweets and will not attempt to prove his statements true. Trying to prove that could cost millions. He will take the cheapest route and try to prove that Dr. Wright was not harmed by being called a “fraud.”

Table of Contents:

Twitter Reports on Wright Vs. McCormack

To get an idea of ​​what’s happening in the UK courts, let’s quote some pseudonymous reporters on Twitter. Let’s take their opinions with a grain of salt, but everything else seems to be top-notch information. For example, to detail our introduction, “The defense does not deny that the tweets are defamatory. They accept that they cannot use the truth defense (it was dropped a year ago), but say there are serious doubts about the plaintiff’s credibility. »

The defense does not deny that the tweets are defamatory.

They accept that they cannot use the truth defense (it was dropped a year ago), but say that there are serious doubts about the plaintiff’s credibility and that the court must be aware of the context and make a fair decision.

— Kershi🧁JD🧁⚡️∞/21m (@btckershi) May 23, 2022

The Plaintiff is Dr. Wright, and in his team’s opening statement, they explained. “This is a defamation claim related to tweets to 5,500 followers in this jurisdiction and words he spoke on a podcast with HoTep Jesus. Although McCormack removed the analyses, using comparisons, the impressions of each tweet are believed to be in the low hundreds to tens of thousands.

It is a complaint for defamation of tweets to 5,500 followers in that jurisdiction and words that he spoke in a podcast with HoTep Jesus. Although McCormack removed the analytics, by comparison, impressions for each tweet are estimated to range from hundreds to tens of thousands.

— Kershi🧁JD🧁⚡️∞/21m (@btckershi) May 23, 2022

That doesn’t sound too bad, however, Dr. Wright expanded on his explanation later. “I was developing my academic career, and together with my lawyers, we identified specific instances of serious harm, including the withdrawal of speaking engagements and the publication of my research.”

3) That Wright’s own argument has now vanished in appeals to the claim that the publications have caused harm. This is based on his evidence that articles he wrote were rejected and conference invitations withdrawn.

— Kershi🧁JD🧁⚡️∞/21m (@btckershi) May 23, 2022

However, the defense says Dr. Wright’s speeches were canceled for other reasons. “This is based on evidence from him that articles he wrote were rejected and conference invitations withdrawn.” Apparently, McCormack’s team presented testimony from several people proving that Dr. Wright’s papers were thrown out. Repeatedly. Sometimes by blind juries.

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

A judicial reporter cat intervenes

To add color to the report, let’s give the microphone to a cat. Please note that this is a recorder account created solely for the Wright Vs. McCormack trial, and do with it what you want. According to the chat, “Wright said he didn’t care if people said he didn’t think he was Satoshi Nakamoto. He gets annoyed when people say that he is a ‘fraud’, or if they use the nickname ‘Faketoshi’.

4/ Wright said he didn’t care if people said they didn’t think he was Satoshi Nakamoto. He objects when people say that he is a “fraud”, or if they use the nickname “Faketoshi”, I mean monkier.

— PatMcCat (@Pat_McCat) May 23, 2022

The cat also recognized the good intentions of the accuser. “Wright was asked why his serious bias case (academic libel, tension at his daughter’s school, etc.) was not adequately argued. His explanation was that he did not want to involve third parties unnecessarily. He also wanted to limit McCormack’s exposure to harm. Magnanimous.”

8/ Wright was asked why his grievous harm case (academic libel, tension at his daughter’s school, etc.) was not properly argued. His explanation was that he did not want to involve third parties unnecessarily. He also wanted to limit McCormack’s exposure to harm. Magnanimous.

— PatMcCat (@Pat_McCat) May 23, 2022

Coingeek reports on Wright vs. McCormack

As a counterpoint, cite BitcoinSV-backed publication Coingeek, which highlighted Dr. Wright’s testimony before his own attorneys.

Related Reading | Why self-proclaimed Satoshi Nakamoto Craig Wright must pay $100 million in damages

“Before leaving the stand, Dr. Wright’s own attorney asked some closing follow-up questions and appeared to use McCormack’s own line of questioning against him. Echoing Evans’ earlier emphasis, he asked Dr. Wright how he felt about having negative comments about his professional observations discussed in open court: “Not very well,” he replied. How does Dr. Wright feel about being accused of giving false testimony? “Horrible, part of being autistic is that we are terrible liars.”

McCormack vs. Wright Day 1: Satoshi Nakamoto at the helmhttps://t.co/htzRHt0sB6

— CoinGeek (@RealCoinGeek) May 23, 2022

Before the end of the day, Peter McCormack took the floor. He will be questioned tomorrow.

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

Share this: