As Personal Representative of my brother's estate, I created this page to shed light on the truth surrounding the lawsuit against Craig Wright. There has been a great deal of misinformation, both inside and outside the courtroom. One misconception is that I have been compensated for pursuing this case—I can assure you, I have not. In fact, this prolonged legal battle has resulted in nothing but significant financial losses. Below, I will dispel other misconceptions and reveal overlooked evidence.

Recent Findings about Debtor Form

W&K Software / IP

The BILLION dollar software that Craig testified about at trial still hasn't been returned. I don’t see anything preventing my attorneys from filing a motion for execution to produce this software based upon his trial admission.

Nov, 15, 2021 - Craig Wright Trial Testimony:
"W&K had the rights and still has the rights to go out there and use that software to build an exchange. They could build something like Coin Base or Kraken. They could have a cryptocurrency exchange. Coin Base which my software was better than even the unimproved stuff is now worth about a hundred billion US dollars." 
Pg. 36

"The simple answer here is all of the intellectual property that Dave improved remains with W&K. All of the things he got external parties to work on, not himself, remains with W&K. It was never taken from it. It's still there. It can still be taken and exploited by Ira if he wants." 
Pg. 85

"If he wants, every single bit of that software is there right now. He could take it. He could try and build something." 
pg. 79

"W&K owned every single right, and it still does today.  He can take and exploit the software TODAY."     
pg. 78
*After 2 years, the software still hasn't been returned.

7-years earlier, Craig's story was completely different:
April 23, 2014 - Email from Craig to Ira
"I have spent the money. If you want, fight me and have a copy of software that will be of little use without the parts we have completed since."  
Pg. 3, line 4
*Craig threatened to return crippled software.
*The jury never heard a word of this conflicting evidence.

Did Craig forget to tell Calvin about the Billion dollar software?
Nov. 4, 2019 - Calvin Ayre passes on buying Dave Kleiman estate
After deliberately wasting months of the estates time in settlement discussions, "Ayre’s attorneys concluded that the only IP on which Kleiman collaborated with Wright was the original Bitcoin code, which was released to the world as open source software in 2009."
*It appears this good faith settlement wasn't so good or faithful after all. 2-years after Calvin allegedly determined that I didn't have rights to any software of value, Craig then testified at trial that I did.

June 19, 2015 - Craig email to Calvin
"I do not want to have challenges to any IP later on when things start to get big. I want to remove any ownership from former directors before they know what it could become, so they cannot challenge anything later."
pg. 18
*The date of this email is the same month that Craig and Ramona were trying to con me into turning over the Coin-Exch shares for worthless R&D rebates. After I declined their offer, they fled Australia and started transfering things into the control of fake trusts and other parties who would assist in concealing W&K assets.

June 19, 2015 - Craig email to Calvin
"After 2020, the trust ends and I have unfettered control of the BTC I own ongoing."
pg. 7
*Craig is treating the Tulip trust or the companies within this fake trust as an extension of himself rather than as a separate legal entity. There's no genuine separation between the debtor's personal affairs and the trust's affairs. This is one of several grounds for piercing the corporate veil of companies placed into sham trusts.

Nov. 10, 2021 - Craig's Slack post made during Trial:
"The deal I discussed with Calvin Ayre in March to June 2015 was for investment. It was an estimate for 50 million. There was one condition, that I had to get rid of Ira Kleiman as a shareholder. I offered Ira 12. He turned me down. No deal with Calvin Ayre."
*This bogus deal between Craig and Calvin was a sham transaction designed to conceal the assets they looted from Coin-Exch and W&K. And the $12m offer was just another empty lie. What Craig and Ramona actually offerred me was 5% of a $54 million dollar rebate that they were hoping to receive from the Australian gov't. I quickly turned the offer down because it made no sense to exchange 10.5 million shares for potentially worthless rebates. Years later, I discovered that their rebates had never been approved. They just wanted to lure me into forfeiting the Coin-Exch shares.

This was their 2015 press release about it:
$54 million Rebate Scheme

July 7, 2017 - Craig does another revision to the sham Tulip Trust that hold all the companies and assets he controls including Bitcoin and W&K software.

He is listed as the beneficiary, but evidence shows Craig personally controlling the bitcoin and not his wife who serves as the trustee. Usually, the trustee of a Trust has sole control over the trust's assets and the responsibility to manage and safeguard them for the beneficiary. Below he talks about the 12ib and 1Fee bitcoin addresses that were allegedly stolen from his personal computer. He claims they were assets of Tulip Trading Ltd., a company held within the Trust.

"Prior to the hack, I held private keys on my personal IT system. This infrastructure is comprised of a huge number of computers and laptops, additional servers, connected televisions and a connected home system. Back-ups of the private keys were held in Microsoft OneDrive and in the Google Cloud."


Craig instructs his ex-wife and wife to sue me.
Why Lynn and Ramona's Lawsuits Are Not Credible:

April 16, 2018 - Craig signed a sworn declaration claiming to have NEVER held any position or ownership in W&K.
"I have never been a director, member, SHAREHOLDER, officer, employee, or representative of W&K or of any Florida business."
*His sworn statement directly contradicts the basis of both Lynn and Ramona's lawsuits.

Ramona’s Lawsuit reads: “As of January 2013, ownership in W&K broke down like this: Craig Wright R&D possessed a two-third interest and David Kleiman possessed a one-third interest.” “Craig Wright R&D, was an Australian entity identified by ABN-97481146384, also doing business as Craig Wright and Craig S. Wright.”

*How can Craig Wright R&D aka Craig Wright hold a two-third interest in W&K when he already swore that he was NEVER a shareholder in the company.


Sept. 10, 2015
From: Ramona Watts
To: Stefan Matthews
Subject: can further details be provided

WFT (Wright Family Trust) was established in August 2013.  At that point Craig (CW R&D) had purchased software personally as well as had agreements (bitcoin rights) with overseas trusts WII and Tulip Trading.  (This information regarding
the other two trusts has not been disclosed to the ATO)

CW R&D sold to WFT the software, bitcoin rights, W&K software, Albaraka, siemens etc.  The ATO are aware of this and have these invoices.

WFT then collated and distributed these from the overseas trusts and overseas entities to the local companies in Australia.

Craig and I are trustees of the WFT.


*In summary, three months after Dave's passing, Craig established the Wright Family Trust and allegedly sold the W&K software to himself. However, in his recent statement to Forbes magazine he claims that the only intellectual property owned by W&K resides solely in his mind.

1. Why is Craig changing his story about W&K property once again? At trial he told the judge and jury that the IP existed as tangible software— Cryptocurrency exchange software and core Banking sofware. (pg. 87, line 21)
"There's no taking its digital assets, so both parties have a copy."
2. Even a decade prior, Craig had informed the ATO that tangible software was owed to Dave's estate, why not return it?
3. Is it credible that none of the W&K IP has found its way into the thousands of patents filed by Nchain, a company co-founded by Wright?

Oh what a tangled web is right.


April 17, 2023 - Statement from Craig's attorneys latest filing
"The law firms make much of Dr. Wright’s inconsistent statements as to who owns W&K. Those statements are a matter of public record and need not be regurgitated here. But whatever Dr. Wright has said, the fact remains is that there is zero evidence that David Kleiman ever owned more than 50% of W&K."

*Zero? How about the contract Craig produced that shows Dave owning 100% of the shares? Or Craig's sworn declaration where he disclaimed all ownership in W&K.

Craig's attorneys admit that their client lies A LOT, but they want the court to believe he would never coerce others to lie for him. Evidence already shows how he has been using family and friends to manipulate W&K ownership since 2013

First Craig told me that Dave owned 50% of W&K, then I saw a contract which said Dave owned 100%, then his wife Ramona emailed me saying Dave held just 33.5%. Years later they decided that even 33.5% was too much so they presented a fake operating agreement which cut Dave's ownership down to 25%. pg. 25
At one point, they even claimed that Uyen Nguyen owned 33% of W&K. Take note how they abandoned that claim and completely removed her as a shareholder. Once they realized Uyen wasn't going to show up at court to support their lies they had to shuffle in replacements. Hence Lynn and Ramona. This group simply won't stop lying.

Sure I'm frustrated by it. After years of these games it's hard to believe a court hasn't put a stop to it.

Here's more proof of Craig employing others to remove Dave's ownership.
Jamie Wilson deposition:
Q.   What happened at that meeting?
A.   Craig said to me that with David's passing that we needed to do the paperwork for him to turn around and take full control and resolve the issue of David being on the, as a shareholder.
pg. 69


Fraud on the Court should be one of the main reasons for Dave's estate to appeal.
Rule 4-3.3(a)(4) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar strictly prohibits a lawyer from knowingly “[p]ermitting any witness, including a criminal defendant, to offer testimony or other evidence that the lawyer knows to be false.”

In my opinion, another violation took place when Craig's attorney said the following to the jury... "Number one, there's not to be a count for forger. There's not going to be a count for liar. There's not going to be a count for ATO cheat."
The jury was basically being told to ignore Craig's truthfulness as evidence. "Lying" itself may not be considered a crime however, there are many crimes that involve lying, such as perjury and fraud. If the defendant is found to have lied in the case, the jury shouldn't be influenced to ignore that evidence.

Even though the federal trial ended a long time ago, Craig's attorneys continue to spread false information as evidenced in a court filing on March 15, 2023.
Despite their possession of hundreds of emails, phone records, and photos documenting my relationship with my brother, they still claim that we didn't have a relationship. Craig's attorneys are fully aware that Dave and I included each other in our respective wills and that I deposited funds into his bank account a year before his passing. The jury didn't get to hear a word of this. They also didnt see a single photograph of us together that would have helped disprove the false narrative that we were estranged.


April 3, 2023 - Craig's latest mockery of the court.
The judge ordered him to complete Form 1.977 by today's date and relinquish it to us. Craig responded by sending the form to only his wife and ex-wife who he claims are members of W&K. If Craig believed that compliance meant sending the form to all members of W&K, then Dave's estate should have also received a copy.

Even the sham lawsuit that his wife filed against me clearly identifies the estate as a member of W&K.

Ramona's complaint states "the company is owned, one-third each, by the estate of Ira Kleiman’s late brother, by Lynn Wright and by the Tulip Trust."


April 26, 2023 - Craig's attorneys tried to prevent me from viewing Form 1.977 by claiming...
"There is no reason why Ira Kleiman personally needs access to the confidential information in order to collect the W&K judgment."
pg. 3

*More of the same nonsense. They know that I should be allowed to review relevant material with my counsel in order to make informed decisions.


May 4, 2023 - The Judge ruled against them and ordered the debtor form to be unsealed. As a result, both the public and myself were able to view it. The form Craig produced didn't contain anyting confidential. In fact, it seemed to lack even the basic information to run a credit check on him. The shocking part is that Craig's attorneys knew he didn't reveal anything confidential yet they still fought to stop me from seeing it.

The unsealed Form can be viewed here::
There were no tax returns, no pay stubs, no drivers license, no social security number. They knew that they were supposed to supply the UK equivalent of our drivers license and SS#. Obviously they are withhollding all of it to intentionally impede collection. Craig also said that his bank accounts were assigned to other parties. which is another blatant lie.


May 24, 2023 - Today Craig and his attorneys were supposed to file a response to explain why they shouldn't be sanctioned for their handling of the debtor form. The attorneys submitted their response on time, but nothing was filed for Craig.

May 25, 2023 - This morning, his attorneys filed a statement, declaring that Craig adopts everything stated in their response. Why didn't they simply include this remark a day earlier if they believed it would satisfy the Judge's order? Instead, his attorneys filed it past the deadline, risking the perception of non-compliance with the court's instructions. Strange.

May 31, 2023 - His attorneys submit another false statement.
They wrote "While Ms. Ang and Dr. Wright are married, their finances are entirely separate"
I don't understand how they can continue getting away with deliberately false statements. They are holding evidence showing it's not true. In their hands they have the UK court document revealing Craig and Ramona held a joint account at Lloyds Bank.

In addition to that, Craig's witness statement shows him controlling assets belonging to his wfie.
"I accessed an Electrum Bitcoin Wallet (the “Electrum Wallet”) of mine, which contained Bitcoin belonging to my wife and me,"
pg. 15 -  paragraph 51


July 26, 2023 - Evidentiary Hearing about Form 1.977
Craig's attorneys's tell the Judge that Bitcoin holdings that appreciate in value should not be considered an investment like stocks or be viewed as anything similar to a bank account. Their argument goes completely against Satoshi's core principles that underlie the idea of individuals being their own bank through Bitcoin.

Judge Reinhart:
If Dr. Wright has possession, custody, and control over bit coin, small b, such that he could buy, sell, and trade them, would you agree that has to be reported on this form?
Craig's attorney:
it is not an account, it is something you possess. I agree that you posses it.
Judge Reinhart:
It's not an investment?
Craig's attorney:
No, Judge, I don't believe it is an investment either.

How can Craig's attorney argue that bitcoin holdings are not an investment when it is identified as exactly that in his Trust?
The Trulip Trust shows that "Wright International Investments" is the company holding mined bitcoin.

If Craig didn't think Bitcoin was an investment, he wouldn't store them in a entity labeled INVESTMENTS'
"Wright International Investments"

Then Craig's attorney concedes that if Craig bought the bitcoin it would likely need to be listed on the Form.
Attorney statement 1:
"Judge, and he didn't buy it, so it is not an investment"
Attorney statement 2:
"if you buy it, it might be a different answer, but it is like you mined a diamond.".

Craig has already admitted to BUYING bitcoin multiple times. He did this at trial as well as in a sworn declration. so according to Craig's attorney he should have listed his purchased bitcoin on the Form.  pg. 3

In 2019, the Judge had this to say about Craig's bitcoin holdings...
The defendant has "a powerful motive not to identify his Bitcoin. As long as the relevant Bitcoin addresses remain secret, he can transfer the Bitcoin without the plaintiffs ever being able to find them." 


Aug. 1, 2023 - Ayre Group has taken a controlling interest in nChain for $570 million dollars.
*The recent maneuverings in Nchain, coupled with Craig's intentional Form delays appear to be games aimed at complicating the recovery of W&K's judgment.

August 7, 2023 - Craig just fired all of his attorneys that fraudulently helped him secure a win against Dave's Estate back in 2021.

Sept. 12, 2023 - Judge Reinhart released his findings about Craig not complying with Form 1.977.
*Even after Craig's counsel conceded that there were omissions on the Form, it doesn't appear Craig will face much of a penalty for his repeated delay tactics. Four years ago the Judge had this to say about such actions. "His conduct has wasted substantial amounts of the Court’s time and the plaintiffs’ time and resources, which could have been saved. His behavior has unnecessarily protracted this litigation.
**Read more details here.

Unless Craig is held accountable for repeated perjury and obstruction, he has no reason to stop. As evidenced by his public statements, part of his strategy is to drain people's time and resources:

"The only thing that matters is crushing the other side" "I would spend 4 million to make an enemy pay 1."

“A US Court cannot force diddly”.   pg. 33


(Below is a Small Portion of Withheld Evidence at Trial)

April 23, 2014 - Craig email to Ira
"Dave and I arranged for the sale of around 500,000 BTC so that we could have access to core banking software."
Assets such as software owed to the estate or W&K should have been produced during discovery. It never was.

April 23, 2014 - Craig email to Ira
"I have spent the money. If you want, fight me and have a copy of software that will be of little use without the parts we have completed since."
This email was proof of fraud and extortion against the estate. The jury never saw this along with other key evidence so they returned with a verdict of only "conversion" against W&K. Absolutely no damages were awarded to the Estate. From my understanding, "conversion" is essentially theft without deception, whereas fraud includes the element of deception. What Craig did to me and my family was 100% intentional deception.

Craig claims that he never sent me ANY of these April 23, 2014 emails.
Here is Proof that He Did

Note: From the email above you can see Craig threatening to return crippled software if I tried to fight him in court. Then just 3 months later he tells the ATO how he doesn't want to rip off Dave's estate by keeping the software. <see below>

Aug. 11, 2014 - ATO Interviews Craig
Wright:   I wanted to make sure that everything was totally legal and all the rest. Dave has other, he’s got an estate who Andrew has been dealing with and I wanted to make sure I didn’t rip off his estate and just go, “Ha ha, it’s my software". I wanted to make sure everything was done legally and above-board so that Dave's heirs get this software which was being more painfui than it should be.
O’Mahoney:   What was the value of that software?
Sommers:   Are you asking what's the
Wright:   The two tots, I think, were, it totals 56 million.

O’Mahoney:   So how did it come to be that - are all the assets of the trust, they were originally sourced from you?
Wright:   And Dave.
O’Mahoney:   And David.
Wright:   Yes.
pg. 41, line 18
**Nothing ever returned to "his estate".
*Notice how Craig never mentions returning W&K assets to anyone other than Dave's estate.


There was one certainty that always existed in this case, the simple fact that Dave's estate received 50% ownership in a company called Coin-Exch. Craig led us to believe that this company held rights to Bitcoin, Banking software, W&K software, and Patents. How is it possible that the estate could lose at trial when these facts exist along with Craig's own admssion?
It makes absolutely no sense why Craig was never compelled to produce any of these company assets leading up to trial.

Nov. 2021 – Craig Trial Testimony
Q. Dr. Wright, it says: The idea conceived by David and me was to develop a system that integrated supervisory control and data acquisition, SCADA software, and a Bitcoin exchange?
A. Yes. Coin-Ex.
Q. "Conceived by David and me."
A. Again, that's why 50 percent ownership approximately each party as founding shareholders. Coin-Ex, both of us were 50/50 on the founding shares.  Pg. 34

The estate was led to believe that we received 50% of Coin-Ex because Craig told me that half of W&K belonged to Dave.
Feb. 15, 2014 - Craig email to Ira
"Dave owned 50% of a US company that controlled a Belize based trust."

Dave's estate was also led to believe that Coin-Exch was holding 438, 857 Bitcoin plus Craig's wallet with 57,000 Bitcoin. Craig sent this email to the ATO and Jamie Wilson in 2013, and then in 2014 he forwarded the same email to me.
*Key evidence related to this document was withheld at trial. It contained more information to conclusively prove how the estate was defrauded.

Exhibits of transferring 438,857 Bitcoin related to Coin-Exch
Pg. 23 - 26

April 16, 2013 - Craig registers Coin-Exch

April 20, 2013 - Craig's alleged wallet shows 57,000 BTC moving into it.
(DEF_00067254 - pg. 69 - ATO GAAR Panel)
Pg. 24 - 26

April 22, 2013 - Craig starts trading on Mt. Gox

April 24, 2013 - Craig's alleged wallet shows 57,000 BTC moving out of it.
(DEF_00067254 - pg. 69 - ATO GAAR Panel)
Pg. 24 - 26

April 26, 2013 - Dave was pronounced dead.

May 3, 2013 - 7-days later Craig claimed to send 438,857 Bitcoin into Coin-Exch
Pg. 24 - 26

Jamie Wilson deposition:
Q.  Did it appear to you that after Dave died, Craig had access to massive amounts of assets that he did not previously have before?
A.   The money came from somewhere.
pg. 11, line 16

Craig assigned Coin-Exch rights to call on 150,000 bitcoin held in
a Seychelles trust (the ‘rights to call on bitcoin’).
Pg. 47 - DEF_01099811

ATO position paper sent to Craig -
"On 22 August 2013 Coin-Exch issued 39,999,999 new shares of which 29,999,999 were allocated to you and 10,000,000 were allocated to Jamie Wilson. The total value of these shares was stated to be $39,999,999 and all the shares were stated to have been paid in full. You advised us on 3 December 2013 that Coin-Exch received bitcoin in exchange for issuing these new shares. On 18 February 2014 you revised this explanation and stated that the share issue was paid for by the transfer of rights to call on bitcoin held by a trust in the Seychelles. On 11 August 2014, you advised that Coin-Exch was funded through a trust in Panama."
Pg. 47 - DEF_01099811

Judge Reinhart ordered Craig to Produce a List of the Bitcoins he held as of December 31, 2013. Did we see any Coin-Exch bitcoin on this list? No. Was this pointed out to Judge Reinhart, Judge Bloom, or the jury? No.
It's strange how there was never any attempt to account for bitcoin associated with Coin-Exch.

May 7, 2019 - "The Court has ordered Dr. Wright to identify all public addresses that he owned as of December 31, 2013"
*Not a single bitcoin related to Coin-Exch was identified.

Craig Wright Sworn Declaration
"Dr. Wright provided a sworn declaration dated May 8, 2019. He swore that in October 2012 he settled a trust “whose corpus included the Bitcoin that I mined, acquired and would acquire in the future.”  pg. 3


More evidence of Fraud never presented at trial

Nov. 2021 - Craig’s trial testimony:
"Calvin was willing to put a loan into the company and potentially come in as an investor. This is part of why I needed the $12 million to pay out Ira. Calvin doesn't like other people in companies that he can't -- he doesn't know. And the deal was he would give me money into the companies, keep them floating, keep them alive. I had to put up Bitcoin as collateral, number one, which I was going to do. And number two, I had to get rid of Ira. Those were the two conditions."   pg. 134

<Compare Craig's testimony to O'Hagan's email below>

Mar 30, 2016 - Andrew O’Hagan (Author of Craig’s Book) sends email to Ira
“I have put your points to Wright. He says:
That Wright and Dave had started a company called W&K — that the IP of this company was later changed to an Australian company called Coin Exch. That Wright gave you shares in this company. That you asked for a cash value for these shares. That Wright offered you £3million. That you refused that amount, asking for double, at which point ‘the deal fell through’."

O'Hagan's Email Reveals Proof of 3 Things
1. Craig lied at trial about a genuine offer of $12 million.
2. Craig told O'Hagan that he and Dave started W&K.
3. The IP was stripped from W&K and transferred into Coin-Exch.

Note: What Craig failed to mention to O'Hagan was that the £3million was NOT in cash or bitcoin, it was all contingent upon the ATO approving his R&D rebates which he already knew was not going to be granted. Craig essentially wanted me to forfeit the 10.5 million Coin-Exch shares for nothing.


Evidence clearly shows that Craig unlawfully gained control of the W&K company back in 2013, and now 10-years later he is attempting to do it again by coercing family members to lie for him.

Craig's Ever-Changing Story about W&K Ownership

April 2, 2013 - Dave is listed as owning all the shares in W&K.
The vendor (Dave) is the owner of all issued shares in the company being ordinary class shares. Ownership is 50% in the vendor's name and 50% in trust held for the purchaser.
Vendor = Dave Kleiman of W&K Info Defense LLC
Purchaser = Craig Wright of Craig Wright R&D
Company = W&K Info Defense LLC

Oct. 30, 2013 - Months later Craig says he owns 51% of the shares in W&K.

Nov. 6, 2013 - Days later Craig says he is the sole shareholder in W&K

Aug. 11, 2014 - Craig tells the ATO he owns 50% of the interest in W&K.
pg. 42, line 7

April 16, 2018 - Craig signs an affidavit claiming to have NEVER held any role or ownership in W&K.
"I have never been a director, member, shareholder, officer, employee, or representative of W&K or of any Florida business.
**How can Lynn and Ramona’s lawsuits have any credibility after this sworn statement from Craig?

April 4, 2019 - Craig testified that he had no idea who owned W&K.
Q.   You have no idea who owns W&K?
A.    I do not know that.   If I do not own it, I do not care about it.

April 15, 2019 - Craig's attorneys claim that Uyen Nguyen and Coin-Exch were members of W&K, but then retract these statements and try to insert alternative members like Craig's wive's.

June 28, 2019 - Two months later Craig swears to remember that his ex-wife received ownership in W&K when it was first established.
Q.   So -- so Lynn told you that she has shares in W&K?
A.   We were on the same phone call with Dave as the company was being constructed. We were on the same e-mails. So she didn't need to tell me. I had the communications between Dave and myself and her at the time. I saw all of this happening. And I communicated with Dave as he was filing the company.

Jan. 13, 2020 - Lynn Wright Deposition:
Q.   Did you communicate with Dave Kleiman over the phone about W&K?
A.   No.

Jan. 13, 2020 - Lynn Wright Deposition:
Q.   Do you know if you were ever - or if you or Craig were ever listed as a manager or managing member in W&K Information Defense?
A.   I - no, I - I don't recall that. Sorry, I - I - I mean, I just don't have any memory of that.

Jan. 13, 2020 - Lynn Wright Deposition:
Q.   What did you tell them about your involvement in W&K?
A.   I told them that I was administrative - the - an administrator.
Q.   Okay. And did you - and was that the - your only relationship with W&K was that you were an administrator?
A.   Yeah.

May 8, 2020 - The story changes again. Craig claims to have given Lynn half of his W&K shares as part of a divorce agreement. But the divorce records obtained directly from Australian courts show that no such agreement existed. Instead the records state, unequivocally, that there were not any 'binding agreements... about family law... involving any of the parties.'
**How can Craig claim to have given her half of his W&K shares when he swore to this court that he was NEVER a W&K shareholder?

John Chesher - (Craig's authorized representative)
"W&K gave Craig Wright rights to the Bitcoins and he has used the Bitcoins to do all this stuff"
*Why Mr. Chesher was never deposed is a good question. He is on record stating that Craig received the Bitcoin from W&K.

The Judge and Jury never got to see 122 ATO Videos in which some include discussions about asset ownership.
pg. 24, line 18

"Satoshi was a team.  Without the other part of the team, he died."

"David Kleiman was my best friend and business partner."

"I told Mark that the only way in which I would be able to finance the deal would be by paying in Bitcoin that Dave and I held."

"Dave and I had completed several papers and books and had a company together."

"Dave and I had a project in the US. He ran it there. We kept what we did secret.
The company he ran there mined Bitcoin. I do not believe there has been anything of this in the estate"

"The amount DK mined is far too large to email."

"I said we mined, not that I was SN to Patrick"

"the concept of a bitcoin exchange by which smart contracts would be connected. This is an idea that I had developed with my business partner David Kleiman (David) for a period of over a decade."
"I started developing smart contracts in 2007. Dave and I worked on this for a number of years up to 2011."

"Dave Kleiman and I started mining in 2009."
"It is a shame Dave died last year before fruition, but all is moving ahead."

"There was a trust set up to put a number of bitcoin that Dave was mining and everything like that into and maintain, the idea being that we would use that to further the goals we were doing, which were all to do with promotion of bitcoin and ciyptocurrenctes we have there."

"I had Dave mine the Bitcoin overseas and all it has cost is sunk. I cannot miss what I never have. I have never touched the Bitcoin we created in the OS trust and companies and what I care about is making something more."

"I was not the person doing the mining. Dave was."

"Dave compiled. He never just used binaries"

"We had worked on a number of patents together"

"I met Dave around 1999 first. We became friends in 2001."
"I started developing smart contracts in 2007. Dave and I worked on this for a number of years up to 2011."
page 4

April 23, 2014 -
Craig email to Ira
"I have files of Dave’s that I cannot access now. These are TrueCrypt partitions. We held backups for the other, but no passwords. I cannot access these. If I cannot finds a key or a password on these, I do not believe that I can on yours."
(ex. 24 p. 7)
Dave's backup files were never returned.

"Dave was smarter than I was in some ways. He broke his wallets into many 50BTC sized addresses. I left several large addresses that are not easy to move without making the world notice.
Dave estate is only worth 12 million IF you want to cash out right now.
IF you stay, you get the value AND the shares."


Dave - Key part of invention

Craig Wright emails -

"Hello Louis,
Your son Dave and I are two of the three key people behind Bitcoin"
"Know also that Dave was a key part of an invention that will revolutionise the world"
Louis email
(ex. 23 p. 2)

Yes "the addresses are in my control now as a matter of fate and other circumstances.  David Reese and David Kleiman have both been essential parts of this project".

"Leave others to be Satoshi and leave Dave not to be.”

Craig Wright's Attorney:
“It is Dr. Wright’s position, your Honor, that Dave Kleiman assisted in editing the protocol related to Bitcoin”

*The Bitcoin protocol relates to the rules of the network described in the Bitcoin whitepaper.

“Bitcoin is at heart a cryptographic protocol.”

**At trial the defense told a different story. They essentially diminished Dave's role to that of a friend who was helping his brilliant pen pal edit a white paper.


‘We never really thought that “we made Satoshi,”’ Wright told me once. ‘It was good. It was done. It was cool. But I don’t think we realised how big it would be.’

‘If I’d come out originally as Satoshi without Dave, I don’t think it would have gone anywhere. I’ve had too many conversations with people who get annoyed because it’s me.’

"I spent more money on the project than Dave"
"Dave died, that was a worse day for me, because I lost a friend and a partner."

Ramona email to Ira:
"Craig and I have put our entire life savings into this business, as did Dave"

Bob Radvanovsky deposition-
Q. Okay. Did they ask you -- ask you whether you thought Dave was Satoshi?
A. Yes.
Q. What was your response?
A. I said yes.


Craig Wright deposition -
Q:    Did you ever share private keys with Dave?
A::    I do not share private keys with my wife.

From: Dave Kleiman      
To: Craig Wright
Date: Oct. 31, 2012

The keys are setup in the TrueCrypt Drive on the main server at

The backups are with in both the UK and as a third in the Isle of Mann.

This email shows Craig and Dave sharing private keys yet at trial I was accussd of deleting Dave's.


Craig Wright deposition -

Q.    Did Dave ever provide you with public addresses that he controlled.
A:    One.
Q.    Which one.
A.     I do not remember.
Q.    Why did he provide it to you?
A.     It was for testing.  
(pg. 206)
**Craig admits to obtaining control of Dave's bitcoin.

Craig Wright email -

Yes "the addresses are in my control now as a matter of fate and other circumstances.  David Reese and David Kleiman have both been essential parts of this project".


Craig Wright deposition -
Q.     Dr. Wright, did you and Dave ever put assets into the same trust?
A.     Dave has never had anything to do with any assets that I have owned, other than Coin-Exch.  The only company that Dave ever had shares for was Coin-Exch and that only occurred because I honoured a promise even though it turns out that the person I thought Dave was different and that he never completed any task nor had anything that he promised to do.
**see contradictions below.

Craig Interview -
55:40 min mark - Craig says...
“Dave and I sort of did work together but Dave completed many things that I wouldn't have completed.”

Craig’s Attorney:  "It is Dr. Wright’s position, your Honor, that Dave Kleiman assisted in editing the protocol related to Bitcoin"
Page 5


Craig Wright deposition -
Q.   Did anyone else have access to the Satoshi account on
Q.   Sorry, Bitcointalk, is it?
A.   Bitcointalk. Yes.
Q.   Who else had access?
A.   Dave.
Q.   When did Dave have access to the Satoshi account?
A.   The exact set-up time, I do not remember, but we stopped using it in December 2010.
(pg. 133)


From: Kimon Andreou
To: Ira
May 17, 2016

"with the addition of the anecdotal information we have from discussions with Dave, all point to Dave and Craig indeed being behind Bitcoin."

"I am convinced Craig and Dave are the co-creators of Bitcoin."


© 2024   All rights reserved.