On December 16, new court filings from the Kleiman v. Wright case show the plaintiffs have responded to Wright’s objections against the magistrate’s court order. Kleiman’s lawyer Velvel Freedman explained that Craig’s statements in court “lacked credibility,” his constant change of stories “demonstrates falsity” and Freedman claims Wright’s “trust documents are forgeries.”
Also read: Plustoken Cash-Outs Could Be Behind BTC Price Drop, Says Report
Wright’s Conduct Antithetical to the Administration of Justice, Says Kleiman Attorney
Since Valentine’s Day 2018, the self-proclaimed Bitcoin inventor Craig Wright has been defending himself in court against the Kleiman family. The lawsuit started because the Kleiman estate believes Wright manipulated the now deceased David Kleiman’s bitcoin assets and intellectual property. The lawsuit has been one of the most high profile cases in the U.S. because it involves billions of dollars in BTC that was ostensibly stored in a blind trust.
After months of discovery hearings, objections, and court orders, the Kleiman estate filed a new motion against Wright’s objection towards Judge Reinhart’s recent court order. On August 26, Wright was ordered by Southern District Court of Florida to distribute half of his bitcoin holdings and intellectual property assets from prior to 2014. At first, Wright and his legal team came to a non-binding settlement, but the deal eventually fell through. After the settlement was broken, Wright attempted to object to Judge Reinhart’s order, claiming a lack of jurisdiction. In the filing on submitted on Tuesday, Velvel Freedman noted that Wright believes he’s been treated unfairly, but Freedman stressed that Wright’s issues in court stem from “his own conduct.”
“Craig is not the victim here. On the contrary, as Judge Reinhart found, Craig’s conduct in this litigation has been ‘antithetical to the administration of justice’ and ‘no lesser sanction would suffice,’” Freedman wrote. Freedman asserted that the record supports Judge Reinhart’s findings and remedy entirely while the order is “absolutely justified given the gravity of Craig’s offenses.” Kleiman’s lawyer added:
Indeed, Craig’s Objection to the Order, far from calling into question its correctness, demonstrates that he is recalcitrant, and – given the opportunity – would engage in the same conduct that led to the Order in the first place. In fact, mere hours after Judge Reinhart read the Order into the record, Craig walked out of court and into an interview where he admitted that he lied to the Court. The next day he gave an interview calling Judge Reinhart a ‘silly judge.’