Ripple CTO Ends Debate Over Legal Claims Pushed by Self-Proclaimed Satoshi Craig Wright

The Craig Wright saga found its way back into crypto history this week as it happens once a year.

This time, however, instead of letting it drift into another circular argument about identity, the author and Bitcoin The white paper published in 2008, Ripple’s CTO intervened with a short but very direct rebuttal that immediately dragged the discussion into the public record that followed the self-proclaimed Satoshi for years.

It started with the same post of Wright who argued that civil courts cannot declare fraud, which implies that any judgment passed was an opinion rather than a conclusion, which is against the legal decisions that say that he is not the author of the Bitcoin white paper.

You may also like it

Ripple’s CTO David Schwartz it also made the refutation of Wright’s thesis easy to understand. It was enough for him to refer to the statutory definition of the term “fraud”, which shows that fraud is not an unattainable criminal threshold, but a well-defined offense built on a misrepresentation, where a false or reckless statement made with the intention that someone relies on it, and causing actual harm when it does so, is enough to satisfy the standard, and this is exactly the reason he will judge. included forged documents, inconsistent sworn statements and attempts to mislead the court.

Safe to say that the conversation changed immediately, because the crypto market has seen this model many times: Wright makes a new promotional angle around BSV, the files reappear, the word of the judges is mentioned again and the narrative returns to the same base line – that no one of the “I am Satoshi” claims to have survived the contact with any formal process, and that the formal debate returns in every attempt to resume the same debate. closed