"I don't believe with certainty". Meanwhile:

I think you should get outside your echo chamber. This isn't about the Bitcoin community or "Bitcoin maxis" as you keep calling everyone around here. It's common sense and a vast amount of evidence suggesting he is not what he claims to be. This person has made it blatantly clear that he is a fraudster to whom I wouldn't trust a single word coming out of his mouth. He has repeatedly lied and presented forgeries. I don't know what else counts as evidence of him being a scam. You choose to ignore all the evidence, and stick to insignificant details, like "both him and satoshi were smart!", "both were involved in cryptography!" or "what if he presents receipt for bitcoin.org?!", as if such a document couldn't be counterfeited given enough money. 

"But isn't there a chance?". Negligible. Judging by the facts, I'd rather bet franky1 being Satoshi if I had to choose between the two.

We have courts which can hopefully notice the fraud in this case. However, a trial isn't the holy grail of truth. Bribery in judiciary is not so uncommon phenomenon. Just because a court says he's Satoshi doesn't mean the public has to unquestionably take this statement as true.