On March 14, 2024, Judge Mellor made a verbal declaration effectively ruling on the case of COPA v Wright. In his declaration, when speaking about when his written judgment would come out, Mellor said, "it will be ready when it's ready and not before."

If you are privy to the events that have recently come to light surrounding this case and you wish to request that the court to look into this matter, you can TLDR this now and proceed to sign.

In a show good faith, the name of the individual that admitted online to facilitating a private exchange between a party in the case and Judge Mellor will be withheld and referred to as Individual 1. The party in the case will be referred to as Blockstream.

This Petition will discuss events that are either well-known, established facts or actual admissions by the party involved. Here is a list of events in chronological order:

1. Individual 1 is a Patent Attorney working in the space.
2. Individual 1 is an active member in an online forum known for being oppositional to Craig Wright and coordinating against him.
3. Individual 1 has admitted to taking money from COPA in the form of "donations".
4. Individual 1 shared online that he would be seeing Judge Mellor soon and crowd-sourced potential questions to ask.
5. Individual 1 committed online to ask a question on behalf of Blockstream, one of the parties named in the case, in an attempt to obtain privileged information.
6. Individual 1 did indeed ask Judge Mellor for privileged information in the case, explicitly stating that it was on behalf of Blockstream.
7. Despite Judge Mellor's prior statement making it clear that he would not entertain questions about such privileged information, Judge Mellor provided it to Individual 1.
8. Individual 1 shared the privileged information with Blockstream.
9. At a recent hearing Judge Mellor stated he had met Individual 1 and discussed related topics but there are discrepancies between Individual 1's account and Judge Mellor's.
10. Judge Arnold, who would go on to deny Wright's appeal was also in attendance at the same event.

In a series of interviews, Individual 1 would later admit to organizing events and "getting" Judges to attend. Speaking of Judge Mellor, in one interview Individual 1 said, "We got him".

Speaking to his attendance at an event that predated the trail where it was already known that Judge Mellor would preside over it, Individual 1 admitted that he had personally "sussed him out", over dinner where Wright's name came up as well as discussions about bitcoin.

Prior Petition
This petition is the second petition in circulation. The first petition was strongly opposed by Individual 1 and was eventually taken down by Change.org after it was inundated with signatures that were executed in bad faith. By flooding the comments sections with language that violated the policies of Change.org, signers were able to social engineer the petitions take-down. Here is a list in chronological order:

1. Individual 1 publicly threatened the X user circulating the petition by publishing his full name and place of residence in a post on X.
2. Individual 1 repeatedly threatened to sue the X user
3. Individual 1 stated publicly that the Police would be visiting the X user's home.
4. Individual 1 scrubbed all of his social media accounts removing incriminating posts and comments.
5. Individual 1 publicly celebrated over the take-down of the petition.

1. If Individual 1 had done nothing wrong, why did he fight so hard to undermine the first petition and go on to scrub his social media accounts?
2. Considering the volatility of the price of BTC, did Blockstream gain an opportunity to profit from privileged information obtained by Individual 1?
3. What other potential financial incentives are at play here?
4. Is it reasonable for the public to suspect bias?
5. Should the public accept "Trust me, bro" as an answer?

One final thing...

Another X user has stated that he met Judge Mellor in Australia where Mellor questioned him about meeting Craig Wright and that, in that meeting, "Mellor said he was going to destroy Craig."

Conclusion
If you believe the above facts reveal impropriety, stand with us. Sign and share this petition!

Is fairness so much to ask?

We want fairness!