You are very confused about who is saying (and claiming, and believing, and justifying, and concluding) what. Please listen to the hearing, then reevaluate in view of the facts and logic therein presented.
https://people.xiph.org/~greg/cypherdoc_fraud_hearing_1.mp3Primary sources are our friends; gossip is not.

Guess im not trained enough in hearing english in order to understand this really. Maybe some other reader can write what the file is about? Its long too.

But maybe you can tell why you think that payment is justified. You are the only one yet, i read of, that thinks he could deliver anything near or over 3000Bitcoins worth.
Best I can tell, iCEBREAKER is saying that cypherdoc helped scam people fair and square, and attempts to use 'violence' to clawback the
ill-begotten 'nobly achieved' gains from him are improper.
This seems to be the standard party line from the hard-core Libertarian wing throughout the history of Bitcoin (or at least since I've been involved.) I've actually come around to this viewpoint somewhat relative to my initial stance. That said, I don't really believe that calling attention to cypherdoc's malfeasance are 'violence' in the standard form (such as use/mis-use of the state sponsored judicial system.) Cypherdoc made a big thing of all the due dilligence he did before pumping Hashfast (and nothing at all of the money he was making shilling for them which, in fact, he tried to hide to the extent that he would flat-out lie to Maxwell about it.)
Cypherdoc can keep his money as far as I'm concerned (which is easy for me to say as someone who didn't even bother to know what-the-fuck Hashfast was much less send them (and cypherdoc) a bunch of my BTC.) What comes around goes around. In the mean time, informing people of his reliability in terms research and suggestions and the like should offend no one. Not even uber-Libertarians.