Back in court today for Kleiman v. Wright, where Craig Wright will continue testifying. Here's @Law360's story about yesterday's proceedings: law360.com/articles/14394…
They haven't brought in the jury yet, as the parties are fighting over whether or not to introduce statements Wright has made in a Slack channel, some during the trial. Kleiman wants to show them to the jury, Wright's attorneys are fighting this.
Wright's attorney says had they known that the Slack channel was being monitored, they would've advised Wright that his statements there could be used against him. She also says that the request to introduce the statements is untimely.
Judge Bloom: "I think that's something that most litigants know not to do."
Wright's attorney says these statements should have been on the exhibit list but Judge Bloom says that if it's a statement made after the start of the trial of course it wouldn't be on the exhibit list.
Among the statements that Kleiman wants to admit is Wright comparing Ira Kleiman to Milton from Office Space.
Kleiman's attorney says he wants to admit it because Wright has said he was bullied because of his autism, and now he's bullying Kleiman. The judge said she won't allow this one, says the animosity between the parties isn't relevant.
Judge Bloom is allowing a statement Wright made in which he said that the full value of the bitcoin-related intellectual property he owns is about $252 billion. She also is allowing several other statements that are relevant and can be used for impeachment purposes.
We're delving into a lot of ATO documents now, focusing on allegedly fabricated documents that Wright gave the ATO during the course of their investigation.
ATO said there were two emails he submitted pertaining to Wright's entities that were never actually sent or that the content of the emails had been altered. Craig says he was hacked.
He also says the ATO auditor involved was fired and they eventually found no fraud.
Wright says he hired forensic experts to go through his companies' files and presented their reports to the ATO, which rejected them. If I understand correctly, the ATO said the reports still show the emails were fabricated.
The jury also saw a July 2015 termination letter from the law firm that had been representing Wright and his entities before the ATO.
From the letter: "Information has been provided to our firm which raises serious questions about the integrity of documents provided by Dr. Craig Wright, both to our office and to the ATO. We believe this information to be credible."
Wright says the law firm did a lot of tax work and his attorney at the firm, Andrew Sommer, was under a lot of pressure to drop him as a client, and that it had nothing to do with any fabricated documents.
We just came back from a short break and are picking up where we left off, discussing Dave Kleiman's coding skills. Wright says "Dave did not create software. Dave edited software."
Wright says "Dave could not code at all." Kleiman's attorney then brings up a 3-year-old Slack message from Wright in which he says, in response to a question about Dave's coding skills, that "he was OK."
Wright explained the message by saying he "wanted to build him up. Build up the legacy." Said something about Ira wanting to tear it down -- I didn't quite catch exactly what he said.
Wright called the ATO investigation a "witch hunt" and says the audits were relentless and constant. "They shut down my companies operating." They didn't stop "until I decided to move out of Australia."
Wright: "I went through over 200 audits in a five-year period."
Kleiman's attorney keeps hammering the fact that Wright didn't contact Dave's father Louis until 9.5 months after he learned of Dave's death. The insinuation is that he was using the time to steal W&K's assets.
Wright has stated multiple times that he contacted Dave's fiancee well before reaching out to Louis, but we haven't seen any evidence of this fiancee. Perhaps that will come out in the defense's case.
Wright says he didn't know Ira existed. Dave had told him he had one brother and that he had died. (He did have a brother who predeceased him. There were three Kleiman brothers in total.) Wright didn't realize there was a brother who was alive.
We're back from lunch and have an issue: Juror 7 has a fever, so now they're deciding whether to adjourn early for the long weekend or excuse her from the trial.
We're adjourning, coming back on Monday morning.
My report for today. Looking forward to a short break from the trial and hoping we don’t have a COVID outbreak in the jury box.

law360.com/articles/14398…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Carolina Bolado

Carolina Bolado Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @CarolinaBolado

15 Nov
Kleiman v. Wright is back up again today with Craig Wright still on the stand being questioned be Ira Kleiman's attorneys. We're not sure how long he'll still be on the stand after lunch; Kleiman's attorney said it depends on how lengthy Wright's answers are.
But direct examination could continue for the rest of the day. Wright's attorneys so far have indicated to the court that they don't plan to cross-examine him, but they reserve the right to change their mind of course.
This morning has been largely about W&K Info Defense's software IP, how much it was worth, where it was transferred, etc.
Read 16 tweets
4 Nov
So a quick rundown of the Kleiman v. Wright trial today: it was cross-examination of Ira Kleiman all day.
Wright's attorneys went through a few topics, including Dave Kleiman's declining health, his personal finances (which were in very bad shape), and Ira's use of the devices he'd found in Dave's house
Wright's attorney showed jurors a slew of emails from 2008 before the bitcoin white paper was released in Oct in which Dave Kleiman told Wright and others that he was not doing well health-wise and was having trouble getting work done
Read 11 tweets
3 Nov
Ira Kleiman is on the stand now in the Kleiman v. Wright trial, telling jurors about his communications with Craig Wright as well as with the Australian Tax Office
He first reached out to Craig Wright in Feb. 2014 saying that he had heard his brother Dave had worked with Wright. "I just think it would be cool to know that David played a part in creating something so incredible."
Craig's replied in an email to Ira that Dave was involved in the bitcoin white paper. "He had the vistomail account, I had the gmx one."
Read 18 tweets
1 Nov
A jury has been seated, and the parties have just laid out their cases in opening statements.
Ira Kleiman's team laid out a timeline from 2008 until today and showed a number of emails and statements in which Craig Wright describes Dave Kleiman as a business partner with whom he mind bitcoin.
But Kleiman's team says Wright's story changed after the filing of the lawsuit in 2018, when Wright began adamantly denying any partnership other than a friendship with Dave Kleiman
Read 7 tweets
17 Aug 20
So I just had a fun interaction with the Florida Board of Bar Examiners.
Me: Hi, I'd like to file a public records request. To whom should I direct it?
FBBE: We don't have to comply with public records requests.
Me: Can you cite to the statute that exempts you from providing public records?
FBBE: If you send us a request we will reply with the statute and explanation.
Me: OK, so can I have an email address to which I can send this request?
Read 7 tweets
11 Jul 19
There was another hearing yesterday in the $10B bitcoin dispute between Ira Kleiman and Craig Wright: law360.com/assetmanagemen…
This was not a continuation of the evidentiary hearing on possible sanctions -- that's set for Aug. 5. This was on Wright's motion for judgment on the pleadings.
He's arguing that the federal court does not have jurisdiction to handle the case because there's no complete diversity of citizenship. In other words, the plaintiffs need to have different citizenship than the defendants.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(