The former CEO of Mt. Gox, Mark Karpeles insists that the 80,000 Bitcoin (BTC), of which Dr. Wright believes they belong to him, were stolen from the stock market in March 2011. Cryptocurrency experts face Karpeles.
Bitcoins have been stolen
Karpeles confirmed to Cointelegraph that the bitcoins living in 1FeexV6bAHb8ybZjqQMjJrcCrHGW9sb6uF were stolen from Mt. Gox:
“I confirm this was confirmed in 2011 and the records are also part of the publicly available court documents.”
In addition, Karpeles speculated about Dr. Wright’s motivation in this turn of events in the Tulip Trust saga, saying that the chief scientist at nChain is only trying to provide some “evidence” of his status:
“To be honest, I think so Wright is just trying to use this address as “evidence” that he is an early Bitcoin user with tons of BTCand you are in a difficult situation where you are a thief (if you uphold your claims) or a scam (if you admit you are wrong). “
The court accepted the Skype protocol
In the meantime, Dr. Wright questioned the validity of the evidence that these bitcoins were ever stolen from Mt. Gox:
“The only evidence I know of law enforcement against the origin of 1Feex Bitcoin is an alleged Skype chat between Mark Karpeles and Jed McCaleb. However, this document is only a text file and not a validated Skype record.” . No other credible evidence or evidence has been provided, such as Mt Gox’s internal / accounting records. “
It should be noted that the Skype protocol was accepted by the court and the parties to the dispute have not questioned its authenticity.
Evidence contradict Dr. Wright
Dr. Wright states that it entered into an agreement to purchase these bitcoins at the end of February 2011 and closed the transaction on March 1 of the same year:
“I agreed to buy the Bitcoin at 1Feex in late February 2011 and it was transferred to this address on March 1st of this year. The total amount of Bitcoin that is now owned by Tulip Trading Limited remains in this direction to this day. “
You have not indicated whether the transaction took place on Mt. Gox.
Cyber security expert Kim Nilsson, whose team spent months analyzing a series of attacks leading to the ultimate collapse of Mt. Gox, refuted Dr. Wright’s story in full in an email to Cointelegraph:
“”The strongest independent evidence I can provide is that the transaction that sent the 80,000 BTC to this address was entirely funded by Mt. Gox addresses and that the MtGox wallet was completely emptied by this transaction at that point which was not the case This is normal behavior and is inconsistent with Wright’s claims to only buy third party coins.. (Then who is this third party?) “.
It should be noted that Mt. Gox’s order books were leaked and leaked documents did not reveal a transaction for this amount.
A letter from Dr. Wright’s lawyers to Bitcoin core developer Wladimir van der Laan and Blockstream.
The stupidest thief in the world?
In the letter Dr. Wright’s lawyers have sent Bitcoin developer Core Wladimir van der Laan (who is not funded by Blockstream) and Blockstream to report that he lost access to these Bitcoin addresses for the first time due to an attack on May 5. February 2020. Interestingly, the alleged thief did not move any of the stolen bitcoins. Either we’re dealing with the stupidest thief in the world, or Dr. Wright just continues to weave its web.
Sergio Demian Lerner, a notable bitcoin researcher, He agrees that it doesn’t make sense if a thief doesn’t move the prey: “Yes, I agree that it doesn’t make sense.” Nilson, however, assumed that this was just another case of Dr. Wright is trying to control the narrative:
“Far from being a dark, unknown address, many people have known this address and the theft behind it for years. Wright has made simple claims with no evidence, but pretends that the burden of proof is on everyone else to adequately refute them, and sets arbitrary standards for the type of evidence he will accept. Wright always tries to change the rules instead of granting anything, but no veiling or bravery will change the facts, and this is an incredibly implausible story, against which he throws with much evidence and nothing to back him up. “
This legal exercise brings an extra nail into Craig Wright’s coffin as Satoshi Nakmaoto. It is hard to imagine that Satoshi Nakamoto would even think of using legal means to gain access to lost or stolen bitcoins. Since the whole spirit of Cypherpunk towards electronic money was to create such a currency that it would be orthogonal for established government institutions.
Vladimir van der Laan told Cointelegraph that he had no intention of replying to the letter:
“At least not. I have no idea about blockstream, I have nothing to do with it.”
Cointelegraph asked Blockstream for a comment, but received no response at the time of printing.