Lawyer sues US homeland dept to probe supposed Satoshi Nakamoto meeting
Update: April 8 at 1:01am UTC: This article has been updated to include James Murphy’s responses to two questions from Cointelegraph.
A crypto lawyer has sued the US Department of Homeland Security, alleging the agency may know who created Bitcoin — compelling the department to share what it knows.
The Freedom of Information Act lawsuit was filed by James Murphy, who based his accusations on claims made by DHS Special Agent Rana Saoud at a conference in April 2019, where she said a few of her colleagues had previously met with four people involved in creating Bitcoin.
“My FOIA lawsuit simply asks for the notes, email and other documents relating to that alleged interview,” Murphy posted to X after announcing the April 7 suit.
“IF the interview really happened as the DHS Agent claimed, there should be documentation of the substance of that meeting,” added Murphy, who goes by MetaLawMan on X.
Source: James Murphy
Speaking at the OffshoreAlert Conference North America in Miami in April 2019, Saoud said DHS agents met with the four people it believed to have created Bitcoin, asking what their motives were and what the “end game” is for Bitcoin.
“The agents flew to California and they realized that he wasn’t alone in creating this, there were three other people, they sat down and talked with them to find out how this actually works and what the reason for it was,” Saoud said in the presentation, which is available on YouTube.
If the DHS resists disclosure, Murphy said he will “pursue the case to conclusion” to solve the mystery.
Murphy, however, noted that it is possible that Saoud and the other DHS agents were mistaken and did not interview the real Satoshi Nakamoto.
Related: Satoshi Nakamoto turns 50 as Bitcoin becomes US reserve asset
Murphy is being assisted by former Assistant US Attorney Brian Field, who specializes in Freedom of Information Act litigation.
The purpose of the Freedom of Information Act is to promote transparency and accountability by granting the public access to information held by the government.
2 questions for James Murphy, aka MetaLawMan
Cointelegraph asked Murphy two questions about the DHS lawsuit. Here are his responses in full.
Question #1: What is your gut feeling—do you think the DHS actually interviewed the real Satoshi?
Answer: “I think it’s very possible that the DHS agent was mistaken in what she said at that conference. I think DHS agents may have met with bitcoin code maintainers, or with actual Satoshi imposters. But, who knows? The DHS agent was a pretty high ranking official and was in a position to know what she was talking about. Either way, I think it will be productive to find out and hopefully resolve this question. Nothing prevents DHS from voluntarily revealing the information without need for protracted litigation.”
Question #2: If the agency did speak with the four creators — who may be ordinary US citizens — why do you believe revealing their identities serves the public interest, even if it could put their safety or privacy at risk?
Answer: “I don’t understand the question. The identities of the creators of all of the largest blockchain projects, like Charles Hoskinson and Vitalik Buterin etc., are all well known in the crypto community. There are also many major figures like Michael Saylor, Tim Draper and others who have amassed enormous wealth through investment in bitcoin and their identities are well known.
There are hundreds of documentaries on YouTube where amateur sleuths have tried to identify Satoshi. I’m not one of them. I’m not hiring investigators to try to track down Satoshi, I’m seeking government records under transparency laws in effect in the U.S. If DHS did, in fact, learn Satoshi’s identity, then I’m not sure what the rationale is for dozens of government employees to have this information but withhold it from the general public.
Our government is required to be transparent and not keep secrets from the citizens, absent a legitimate national security concern or other limited exemption. We consider this a fundamental aspect of our freedom in the USA. It is why we have something called the “Freedom of Information Act.” Transparency is good, the government hiding information from the citizenry is generally bad.
I am open about the fact that I am pro-bitcoin, having been an investor in bitcoin and a bitcoin miner since 2017. I speak to groups of executives and policy makers about bitcoin and I advocate for bitcoin adoption. What I find when I give these talks is very often these audiences (who are new to bitcoin) struggle with the idea that the creator of bitcoin is unknown while the provenance of the other major crypto projects is (relatively) transparent.
So, my intention is to either conclusively refute the claim of the DHS agent that they interviewed Satoshi, or achieve some transparency that will open the door to greater bitcoin adoption in the U.S. and around the globe. I support President Trump’s initiatives to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and Digital Asset Stockpile.
Since the bitcoin code is open source and can only be changed through the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) procedure, Satoshi (if he or they were identified) would have no ability to unilaterally affect changes to bitcoin. As a result, any revelation of Satoshi’s identity is unlikely to adversely impact bitcoin. It’s more likely that such transparency would be a net positive for growing bitcoin adoption. Others may have different views on that and I respect their opinions.”
Efforts to identify Satoshi Nakamoto have failed
The lawsuit follows a wave of recent efforts attempting to uncover Satoshi’s identity.
Last October, a controversial HBO documentary claimed that Peter Todd, a Bitcoin cypherpunk, invented Bitcoin. Todd refuted that conclusion, and most industry pundits said HBO’s evidence was weak.
Nick Szabo, Adam Back and Hal Finney have also had their names tied to Satoshi’s identity. Szabo and Back regularly refute claims they’re Satoshi, as did Finney before he died in 2013.
Meanwhile, members of the Bitcoin community are split on whether unveiling Satoshi’s identity would be a net positive for Bitcoin.
Some worry that revealing Satoshi’s identity could compromise Bitcoin’s decentralized ethos and put Satoshi’s safety at risk, while others want to be reassured that Bitcoin wasn’t created by the US government.
Magazine: 10 crypto theories that missed as badly as ‘Peter Todd is Satoshi’
Migrants convicted of sex offences in the UK or overseas will be unable to claim asylum under government plans to change the law to improve border security.
The Home Office announcement means foreign nationals who are added to the sex offenders register will forfeit their rights to protection under the Refugee Convention.
Politics latest: Tory-Reform coalition would be disaster, warns PM
As part of the 1951 UN treaty, countries are allowed to refuse asylum to terrorists, war criminals and individuals convicted of a “particularly serious crime” – which is currently defined in UK law as an offence carrying a sentence of 12 months or more.
The government now plans to extend that definition to include all individuals added to the Sex Offenders’ Register, regardless of the length of sentence, in an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which is currently going through parliament. It’s understood they also hope to include those convicted of equivalent crimes overseas.
Those affected will still be able to appeal their removal from the UK in the courts under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
More than 10,000 people have now been detected crossing the Channel. Pic: PA
It is unclear how many asylum seekers will be affected, as the government has been unable to provide any projections or past data on the number of asylum seekers added to the Sex Offenders’ Register.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Sex offenders who pose a risk to the community should not be allowed to benefit from refugee protections in the UK.
“We are strengthening the law to ensure these appalling crimes are taken seriously.”
Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls Minister Jess Philips said: “We are determined to achieve our mission of halving violence against women and girls in a decade.
“That’s exactly why we are taking action to ensure there are robust safeguards across the system, including by clamping down on foreign criminals who commit heinous crimes like sex offences.”
Read more:
PM ‘doesn’t want to see strike action’
Former Streeting aide avoids jail after exposing himself
The Home Office would like voters to see this as a substantial change. But that’s hard to demonstrate without providing any indication of the scale of the problem it seeks to solve.
Clearly, the government does not want to fan the flames of resentment towards asylum seekers by implying large numbers have been committing sex crimes.
But amid rising voter frustration about the government’s grip on the issue, and under pressure from Reform – this measure is about signalling it is prepared to take tough action.
Conservatives: ‘Too little, too late’
The Conservatives claim Labour are engaged in “pre-election posturing”.
Chris Philp MP, the shadow home secretary, said: “This is too little, too late from a Labour government that has scrapped our deterrent and overseen the worst year ever for small boat crossings – with a record 10,000 people crossing this year already.
“Foreign criminals pose a danger to British citizens and must be removed, but so often this is frustrated by spurious legal claims based on human rights claims, not asylum claims.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Has Labour tackled migration?
The Home Office has also announced plans to introduce a 24-week target for appeal hearings (known as “first-tier tribunals”) to be held for rejected asylum seekers living in taxpayer-supported accommodation, or for foreign national offenders.
The current average wait is 50 weeks. The idea is to cut the asylum backlog and save taxpayers money – Labour have committed to end the use of asylum hotels by the end of this parliament.
It’s unclear how exactly this will be achieved, although a number of additional court days have already been announced.
The government also plans to crack down on fake immigration lawyers who advise migrants on how to lodge fraudulent asylum claims, with the Immigration Advice Authority given new powers to issue fines of up to £15,000.
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has called on government officials to address questions related to US President Donald Trump’s memecoin and his media company.
In an April 25 letter to Jamieson Greer, acting director of the US Office of Government Ethics (OGE), Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts and California Democratic Senator Adam Schiff requested that officials address concerns about Trump’s memecoin after the president announced a dinner and White House tour for some of the individuals who held the most TRUMP tokens. The two senators requested that Greer provide information on safeguards and guidelines related to whether foreign actors and others could buy political influence with the president, potentially impacting his policy positions and federal pardons.
“President Trump’s announcement promises exclusive access to the presidency in exchange for significant investment in one of the President’s business ventures,” wrote the two senators.
“In promising such access, this proposition may implicate several federal ethics laws and constitutional prohibitions, including the federal bribery statute and emoluments clauses of the US Constitution. It also raises the troubling prospect that foreign actors are using the memecoin as a vector to buy influence with President Trump and his associates without needing to disclose their identities publicly.”
The letter was sent the same day Warren reportedly expressed similar concerns about Trump’s potential conflicts of interest with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). According to an April 25 Reuters report, the Massachusetts senator urged SEC Chair Paul Atkins to ensure that oversight of Trump’s media company was “free from undue political interference and influence from the President and his administration.”
Related: Trump’s WLFI crypto investments aren’t paying off
Though ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, Warren does not have the authority to direct Congress’s agenda with Democrats in the minority. Two Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives have already called for Trump’s impeachment over his memecoin dinner.
Warren added:
“The American people deserve the unwavering assurance that access to the presidency is not being offered for sale to the highest bidder in exchange for the President’s own financial gain.”
At the time of publication, it was unclear who among the top TRUMP memecoin holders would attend the dinner, scheduled to be held on May 22 at Trump’s golf club in Washington, DC. Speculation and analysis of users suggested that Trump supporters, including Tron founder Justin Sun, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, and others, could attend, though none had been confirmed as of April 28.
Magazine: Trump’s crypto ventures raise conflict of interest, insider trading questions
Crypto users betting on the outcome of the snap election to determine the next Prime Minister of Canada appear to be favoring a Liberal Party victory as residents head to cast their votes.
As of April 28, cryptocurrency betting platform Polymarket gave current Canadian Prime Minister and Liberal Party candidate Mark Carney a 79% chance of defeating Conservative Party candidate Pierre Poilievre in the race for the country’s next PM. Data from the platform showed users had poured more than $75 million into bets surrounding the race, predicting a Poilievre or Carney victory.
The odds suggested by the platform, as well as those from many polls, show a nearly complete reversal of fortunes between the two candidates after former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned in January. Trudeau and, by association, many in the Liberal Party, faced criticism over the handling of Canada’s housing crisis and questions about how he would face US President Donald Trump’s then-proposed tariffs.
Following Trudeau’s resignation, Trump stepped up rhetoric disparaging Canada, repeatedly referring to the country as the US’s “51st state” and Trudeau as its “governor.” The US President also imposed a 25% tariff on goods imported from Canada in March. The policies seem to have led to increasing anti-Trump sentiment in Canada, with many residents booing the US national anthem at hockey games and making comparisons between the president and Poilievre.
This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway