IRA Kleiman Suspicious Actions Emerge on Day 4 of Kleiman vs. Wright Trial

The fourth day of the historic Kleiman v Wright trial has proven to be very enlightening on the defense side as the continuation of Ira Kleiman’s cross-examination shows how, at this point in the trial, it would have been impossible for Dave Kleiman to have been a co-author of Craig Wright in the Bitcoin white paper and a business partner in the mining of 1.1 million Bitcoin as alleged by plaintiff Ira Kleiman, given the obvious lack of evidence.

Andres Rivero, counsel to the defense, has made it clear through questions he asked to Ira Kleiman how the latter knew next to nothing about his brother Dave Kleiman’s supposed involvement in the creation and mining of Bitcoin and had no proof that Dave Kleiman even had a single Bitcoin. In fact, by the end of the cross-examination, Ira Kleiman has come off as suspicious.

The White Paper Emails

Rivero presents an entire batch of email communication between Dave Kleiman and Wright that demonstrates in detail the work that Kleiman and Wright were doing in 2008. And yes, the two were co-writing a white paper. However, it was not the Bitcoin white paper.

It is a white paper entitled “Overwriting Hard Drive Data: The Great Wiping Controversy;” and the email exchanges show the process, from conceptualization to publication, Kleiman and Wright had as they wrote the white paper.

“Does this sound like two people working together?” Rivero asked.

“Yes,” Ira Kleiman replied.

The Overwriting Hard Drive Data white paper was published in September 2008, while the Bitcoin white paper was released in October of the same year—just less than two months apart. If Dave Kleiman and Wright also co-wrote the Bitcoin white paper, there should have been an overlapping of information in the emails, or there should have been a separate batch of emails of their correspondence. But there is none.

There is just one email in which Wright asked Dave Kleiman’s help in editing something that made mention of the terms “bit cash” and “bit coin.” And this email implies that it was the first time Wright told Kleiman about this “revolutionary idea,” and it was only after editing is needed—meaning the white paper has already been written, it just needed polishing.

The plaintiff’s claim of back-and-forth emails between Dave Kleiman and Wright working on a white paper is indeed true. Unfortunately, it was not the Bitcoin white paper they were working on.

The “Racks of Servers” Used to Mine Bitcoin

There was a previous mention of a “rack of servers somewhere in Florida” that was managed by Dave Kleiman and was allegedly used to mine the 1.1 million Bitcoin that is now in Wright’s possession.

However, when Ira Kleiman was asked if he has ever seen these “racks of servers” and if he has any knowledge or evidence of Dave Kleiman buying equipment that can be used for Bitcoin mining, he answered “No.”

An examination of Dave Kleiman’s financial records showed there was no evidence that he ever purchased said kind of equipment—this kind of purchase would have stood out as specialized mining equipment and would have been highly expensive.

Ira Kleiman also admits that Dave Kleiman had not mentioned Bitcoin or anything that would imply the latter had mined and owned Bitcoin to him. and to add to this glaring lack of evidence to the plaintiff’s claims, Dave Kleiman left behind a will that Ira Kleiman had already read. Again, there was no mention of Bitcoin or anything related to Bitcoin. Nothing at all.

Ira Kleiman’s Suspicious Actions

Evidence presented by the defense shows how Ira Kleiman has over 30 email addresses that he used to communicate with different people and entities. As if it is not bizarre enough that he has this many email addresses, the handles are also weird.

For instance, Ira Kleiman used [email protected] in his communication with the IRS about the Australian Taxation Office paperwork. It is worth mentioning that people who usually create many different email addresses are those who have the intention of segregating information and keeping identities separate.

Also highly significant to the case is the fact that Ira Kleiman had reformatted Dave Kleiman’s laptop and all of his hard drives, which the former had come into possession of after the latter’s death. Ira Kleiman had also given away Dave Kleiman’s cell phone.

It is as if evidence of Dave Kleiman’s work and life, who was a computer forensics expert, had been conveniently erased. Because if there was ever any definitive proof that Dave Kleiman had co-created and mined Bitcoin, it would have been in those hard drives.

The defense also points out that Ira Kleiman has sued Dave Kleiman’s best friends and business partners in a computer forensics company Patrick Paige and Carter Conrad on top of Wright, who also considered Dave Kleiman a very good friend. To Ira Kleiman’s confirmation of this fact, Rivero said something to the effect of, “Is it your habit to sue your dead brother’s best friends?”

After Day 4 of the Kleiman v Wright trial, the defense has successfully painted Ira Kleiman to be someone who is using his dead brother’s name to dig for money wherever he can find it, which may very well be the actual truth.

Source: Read Full Article

click fraud detection