Thread by @Arthur_van_Pelt

Judgment is in.

A crushing defeat for Wright, who in name is awarded 1 GBP (he can't appeal), has to pay Peter's costs (TBD).

Craig is now also under serious danger of jailtime for perjury and breaking court embargos (if Peter decides to pursue that).

judiciary.uk/judgments/wrig…

In other words: Judge allowed Craig to win on implied harm, awarded Craig 1 GBP, that way he can't appeal to harass Peter any further. It's now up to Peter if he wants to countersue for abuse of court, perjury, contempt etc. My 2cents based on what I'm reading.

The summary of the court's press release is catching it nicely. I'm only very curious what Peter McCormack is going to do next. I'm imagining he's smelling blood. A lot of #Faketoshi blood.

Source:
judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl…

Good question, how I determined that Craig Wright has to pay costs to Peter McCormack? The judge already hinted to that, but indirectly. 👇

https://twitter.com/Arthur_van_Pelt/status/1554098455961796608

"the chief reason for the nominal damages was the judge’s UNCERTAINTY over the evidence Dr. Wright had given over conferences he had allegedly been disinvited from as a result of McCormack’s defamatory tweets" - Jordan 🤡 Atkins

https://twitter.com/KlausLovgreen/status/1554101050503749633

Let's be perfectly clear here, there was no 'uncertainty' whatsoever with this judge. 😂

"Dr Wright advanced a deliberately false case as to the disinvitations from academic conferences in his Amended Particulars of Claim and his first witness statement."

"Please do note that the process is not complete and therefore I will not be commenting further on this."

Unsurprisingly, there's still something brewing... 😈

https://twitter.com/PeterMcCormack/status/1554068978678411264

Craig is appealing anyway. That will fail miserably.

"In a statement distributed by his lawyers, Wright said, "I intend to appeal the adverse findings of the judgment in which my evidence was clearly misunderstood.""

coindesk.com/policy/2022/08…

Of course @ONTIERLLP disabled comments on their tweet about the case. As they know already what's coming next, when the judge ruled "Joseph v Spiller: In my judgment, the same principle applies here".

Right, @SimonCohen85? 🙂

https://twitter.com/ONTIERLLP/status/1554107094143492096

Craig's camp coping.

Lastly, a nugget from the ruling. Craig's false autism excuse is, en passant, also being completely destroyed.

"straightforwardly false in almost every material respect"

Welcome to law, Craig. 😈