Article Image

IPFS News Link • Bitcoin

New Liberty Dollar Founder Subpoenaed in the Billion-Dollar Bitcoin Lawsuit

• Bitcoin.com - by Jamie Redman

The court participants discussed parsing through 27,000 bitcoin addresses as well the Kleimans' forensic expert finding discrepancies within specific documents and contracts between the two business partners. Moreover, it seems the Kleimans' legal counsel has been pursuing a subpoena in order to compel the former managing director of the New Liberty Dollar, Joseph Vaughn Perling, to appear in court.

Two Expert Witnesses Testify in the Billion-Dollar Bitcoin Lawsuit

Kleiman v. Wright, the high profile court case in West Palm Beach, Florida has had a day filled with expert witness testimony from both sides of the case. Wright is being sued by the estate representing the now deceased David Kleiman. According to the lawsuit, the plaintiffs believe self-proclaimed Bitcoin inventor Craig Wright manipulated David's bitcoin assets and intellectual property inheritance. "As of the date of filing, the value of these assets far exceed $5,118,266,427.50 USD (before punitive or treble damages)," the opening statements of the lawsuit reads. During the hearing on August 5, Dr. Matthew Edman, a cryptography expert, and the Kleiman estate's witness, told the court that there were various discrepancies within the court documents he reviewed. Wright's attorney Amanda McGovern from the legal firm Rivero Mestre cross-examined Edman. The forensics expert said he examined the metadata tied to an alleged deed of trust, and emails between Kleiman and Wright.

New Liberty Dollar Founder Subpoenaed in the Billion-Dollar Bitcoin Lawsuit

When McGovern asked the expert if anyone could manipulate the metadata, Edman conceded and told the court that it was possible. "Anybody could have manipulated the metadata, but again there are a number of indicators in the metadata that are consistent with the defendant." Edman further opined that to him it was improbable that it could have been just anyone and noted that timestamps matched Wright's home of residence in Australia. The plaintiff's expert witness couldn't explain to McGovern why someone would manipulate the metadata. Just like his prior testimony, Edman continued to assert throughout his statements that there was circumstantial evidence the changes derived from the defendant.


ContentSafe