> the jury decided ZERO fraud was committed

… toward Dave Kleiman or W&K, which is perfectly consistent with Craig and Dave having nothing to do with the creation of Bitcoin. It’s not like they found “no fraud in anything”! LOL!

> if CSW claims he is 100% Satoshi and is not guilty of fraud, then CSW won the case

The case was never about whether Craig was or wasn’t “Satoshi”. That wasn’t even in dispute in the case! LOL!

> The $100mm was awarded

Ah, so you admit Craig lost the case. Thank you.

> Also, W&K Info Defense was legally collapsed

Then how was the case tried under federal law?

> so he’s going to lose the subsequent case

Ah, so what will the excuse be when Craig/Lynn lose that case?

> That’s right from the original document.

What original document?

> frame CSW with the ATO (didn’t happen, CSW won that case too)

Nope, Craig’s conflating a tax deduction thing that he won in 2013 with the tax rebate scam that was the focus of the case. They aren’t related and Craig didn’t win the latter. He didn’t even try to bring evidence to show it. It was a gigantic embarrassment.

> Yep Sam, sure looks like you’re wrong as usual.

LOL! Craig *only* owes $100 million is peak cope.

> The Cobra bitcoin.org case is over, CSW won the case.

On the merits? Or was it a default since Cobra didn’t identify himself?

> Stuart Hoegner of Tether/Bitfinex, quit the case after CSW’s evidence was approved, like 9,000 documents.

The same documents are in the Norway case.

> So that’s 3–0.

Again, it’s one loss for Craig on the merits. Zero wins on the merits.

> Evidence sucks (for you) doesn’t it?

Let’s see that “original document” and we’ll talk about “evidence”.