Australian computer scientist Craig Wright lied “extensively and repeatedly” to courts and committed forgery “on a grand scale” in efforts to falsely claim that he invented Bitcoin, a judge at London’s High Court ruled on Monday.

Wright has long claimed to be “Satoshi Nakamoto” — the pseudonym used by the author of Bitcoin’s 2008 foundational white paper. Very little is known about the mysterious cryptocurrency creator, though they’re widely presumed to be the largest holder of Bitcoin, controlling an estimated 1.1 million BTC (worth roughly $77 billion at the time of writing).

Satoshi’s identity was connected to Wright in reports published by Gizmodo and Wired in 2015, though the latter publication noted that some of the clues that suggested Wright was the elusive Bitcoin creator were planted by Wright himself. Later reports from Wired, Vice, Forbes, and other outlets also found inconsistencies in the evidence pointing to Wright being the creator of Bitcoin.

Wright spent the following years aggressively attempting to prove that he is Satoshi: testifying on several occasions that he wrote the currency’s original white paper, challenging people developing Bitcoin-related projects, and filing defamation lawsuits against those who accused him of lying. Wright’s latest legal battle was instigated by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), a nonprofit organization that sought to stop him from allegedly threatening developers by disproving his claim to Satoshi’s identity.

COPA rejected Wright’s offer to settle the case in January, alleging the deal contained “loopholes that would allow him to sue people all over again.”

The case concluded on March 14th after a six-week investigation, with London High Court Judge James Mellor ruling that Wright didn’t create Bitcoin and is not Satoshi. “In both his written evidence and in days of oral evidence under cross-examination, I am entirely satisfied that Dr Wright lied to the court extensively and repeatedly,” said Judge Mellor in the 231-page ruling released this week. “In my judgment, he is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is.”

In his ruling, Judge Mellor said:

Having considered all the evidence and submissions presented to me during the Trial, I reached the conclusion the evidence was overwhelming. At that point, I made certain declarations (because I was satisfied they are useful and are necessary to do justice between the parties), as follows:
First, that Dr Wright is not the author of the Bitcoin White Paper.
Second, Dr Wright is not the person who adopted or operated under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto in the period between 2008 and 2011.
Third, Dr Wright is not the person who created the Bitcoin system.
Fourth, Dr Wright is not the author of the initial versions of the Bitcoin Software.

Most of the forged evidence was “clumsy,” according to Mellor, who said that Wright frequently resorted to laying the blame on other (often unidentified) people or “what can only be described as technobabble delivered by him in the witness box” when his lies were exposed. “I tried to identify whether there was any reliable evidence to support Dr Wright’s claim and concluded there was none,” said Mellor, concluding that “the case that Dr Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto is overwhelming.”

The matter of injunctive relief will be argued in a future hearing. Wright says he will appeal against the ruling “on the matter of the identity issue.”