Craig Wright's lawyers object to court motions with weakest arguments yet

In the latest responses to motions and objections in the Kleiman case, Craig Wright's legal team presented some of the weakest arguments seen in the trial.

While one of the filings maintains the position that Wright was unable to comply with the court, the other claimed the plaintiff's inability to pay the costs for the deposition of his wife means she shouldn't have to testify.

New filings in the Wright case claims he always acted 'in good faith'.

While many things can be said about Craig Wright's behavior, "Reasonable" and "In good faith" aren't one of them.

On Dec. 23, Wright's lawyers filed two documents with the Southern District court in Florida-one was a reply in support of an objection to an earlier court motion, while the other was a response to a motion filed by the Kleiman estate regarding the deposition of his wife, Ramona Watts.

The first document aims to deliver more information that would prove that Wright shouldn't be sanctioned for being unable to comply with court orders.

Wright's team argues that not only did Wright "Prove" he was unable to provide the addresses of the Bitcoin he mined prior to 2013, but that he also directed Steve Shadders, the CTO of nChain, to investigate the matter.

The Kleiman estate cited Shadders' testimony as proof that Wright was lying, as he said he never saw the encrypted file where Wright claims the keys to the addresses are held.

"So what? Mr. Shadders' testimony was about the work that he performed on Dr. Wright's behalf to reconstruct a list of the bitcoin that Dr. Wright mined. It was not necessary to see the file to perform that work."

Earlier in December, the Kleiman estate called for Ramona Watts, Craig Wright's wife of 6 years, to testify at trial.