Updated on:12/11/2025 05:51 PM 
The ongoing legal battle surrounding Bitcoin's mysterious origins intensified on the second day of proceedings as Dr. Craig Wright, the Australian computer scientist claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto, faced rigorous cross-examination in a high-stakes cryptocurrency patent lawsuit.
Wright, who asserts he created the world's first decentralized cryptocurrency, confronted serious allegations from the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) regarding the authenticity of crucial evidence submitted to support his identity claim. The court proceedings revealed a dramatic clash between Wright and opposing counsel over what prosecutors described as manipulated digital evidence.
The morning session commenced with Justice Mellor noting challenges in managing Wright's seemingly disorganized presentation approach. Wright was officially sworn in at approximately 11 am GMT, marking the beginning of what would become a contentious day in the blockchain identity dispute.
Throughout the proceedings, COPA lawyers systematically dismantled Wright's claims by presenting expert analysis of questionable documents. The prosecution highlighted alleged manipulation of historical web archives, specifically citing evidence that Wright may have utilized the WayBackMachine to fabricate records of website access from Bitcoin's early days.
Wright's testimony took an unexpected turn when he admitted to being unable to simultaneously operate a computer mouse and mobile phone - a peculiar admission for someone claiming to have developed Bitcoin's underlying technology. This revelation added significant irony to the proceedings and raised questions about his technical capabilities.
The court examined multiple documents presented as evidence of Wright's early involvement in Bitcoin's conceptualization. Forensic experts testified to discrepancies in font sizes, alignments, and timestamps within these documents. Wright attributed these inconsistencies to printing quality rather than intentional manipulation, though his explanation failed to convince the prosecution.
Post-lunch proceedings saw Wright adopt a more confrontational approach, frequently invoking legal privilege and engaging in what observers described as pedantic wordplay. When pressed about a Bitcoin whitepaper extract submitted to Australian authorities, Wright appeared increasingly flustered while attempting to explain discrepancies in the documentation.
COPA's legal team presented compelling testimony from digital forensic experts who analyzed files claimed to predate Bitcoin's 2009 launch. These experts discovered anachronistic content, including references to Bitcoin being "introduced in 2009" in documents supposedly created before 2008.
Wright consistently maintained his position, stating that if he were to forge documents, they would be executed flawlessly - a claim that further intensified skepticism among courtroom observers.
The cross-examination of Craig Wright is scheduled to continue through February, with the cryptocurrency patent trial expected to address additional evidence and witness testimonies in the coming days. Legal experts suggest this case could have significant implications for intellectual property rights within the blockchain industry.
| Date | Activities | Duration |
|---|---|---|
| Feb. 5 | Oral Openings | 1 day |
| Feb. 6 – 9 | Cross-examination of Craig Wright | 6 days |
| Feb. 12 – 13 | Craig Wright's cross-examination continued | 6 days |
| Feb. 14 – 16 | Cross-examination of remaining fact witnesses for Craig Wright | 3.5 days |
| Feb. 19 – 23 | Cross-examination of fact witnesses for COPA / developers | 4 days |
| Feb. 23 – Mar. 1 | Cross-examination of digital forensic experts | 5 days |
| Mar. 1 | Cross-examination of both cryptocurrency experts | 0.5 days |
| Mar. 4 | [One-week gap] | – |
| Mar. 12 – 15 | Oral closing submissions | 4 days |
