Early hints of vindication for Craig Wright in the Kleiman case
In a most recent document concerning motion to continue mediation by video conference released by the attorneys for Dr. Craig Wright in the case of Ira Kleiman v Craig Wright it appears Dr. Wright has seen early indicators of vindication.
The statement claims that in deciding whether to postpone mediation scheduled on June 18, 2019 that the:
“…plaintiffs’ case is insufficient for the defense to evaluate plaintiffs’ claims and therefore impossible to create any settlement authority…The defendant cannot now make sense of the claims against him by Dave Kleiman’s estranged brother cum representative of the estate. Defendant has yet to receive any meaningful discovery from plaintiffs that supports the allegation made against Dr. Wright of the alleged “theft” of Bitcoin and intellectual property from his good friend Dave Kleiman”
The evidence brought against Dr. Wright by Ira Kleiman is lacking in enough discovery (evidence) to come to any reasonable or viable agreement as argued by the defense. Further,
“Delays and major gaps in plaintiffs’ production have made it impossible to gain a reasonable understanding of the evidence behind plaintiffs’ allegations against Dr. Wright. Instead, this case has been tried against Dr. Wright’s character and credibility primarily based on internet rumors and false inferences”
The defense clearly states that not only is there a lack of evidence that Dr. Wright stole from his close friend Dave Kleiman but that the plaintiff, Ira, has failed to produce any form of evidence worth forming a defense against in court.
“…key witnesses with knowledge of the alleged facts of this case do not substantiate (and, in fact, totally contradict) plaintiffs’ claims. These witnesses include Dave’s closest friends and work colleagues.”
Without physical evidence or the testimony of key witnesses it appears the case will fall flat of any level of guilt by Dr. Wright and instead appears to be putting Ira in the negative light.
“Ira stated under oath that he never once visited his disabled and dying brother in the VA hospital or at his house, which was just five minutes away from his own home… Ira stated under oath that he destroyed and compromised the evidence that Dave had in his possession at the time of his unfortunate death. Specifically, Ira testified that he discarded Dave’s papers and the electronic device that Dave had closest to him when he was found dead at his home.”
Evidence given freely under oath that the pursuant of this case against Dr. Wright destroyed or discarded necessary evidence relevant to the case while making claims without evidence to back up the case appear to make this entire argument fall on its face. When asked to provide the documents on which the plaintiff’s case rest, the defense were told they would have to go through the court to get these documents.
If one had evidence against the person they are pursuing in a legal setting, what reason would there be to hide it from the initial discovery? Why not make the information freely available and immediately? Is the goal not to win the case? The only determination that could be made in lieu more information being exposed by the hand of the court is that there simply is not any other evidence to present. If mediation is not postponed and no further evidence is presented by court order, June 18, 2019 is shaping up to be vindication for Dr. Craig Wright.
Link to court document https://t.co/8UDbK7QSza
5 of 5 reviewers say it's worth paying for
0 of 5 reviewers say it's not worth paying for