Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-27T02:07:17.877Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"bcc27c32-d908-481f-bc22-6b47a6d8bf2d","new_score":0,"page_slug":"babak-zanjani-network-expanded-ofac-designations-july-2026","prev_score":0,"reason":"The reviewer disputed 3 of 27 checked claims (11%), which falls in the minor-issues revision band. One of those three, however, is not a trivial error: the page's 'Regulatory and Legal Status' section states that both the January and July 2026 OFAC actions relied solely on the sanctions-evasion authority (Executive Order 13902), but OFAC's own January designation records show the two exchanges also carried a separate terrorism-financing designation tag tied to IRGC support -- a materially graver basis than the one the page cites, and one it never mentions (claim_findings[8]). The page also applies a $94 billion transaction-volume figure to both exchanges collectively when the underlying Treasury figure and independent reporting attribute it to one exchange alone (claim_findings[10]), and it asserts in one section that Zanjani was 'released' while a later section says he 'remains subject to a 20-year imprisonment sentence,' without acknowledging that his actual custodial status is genuinely unresolved in the sourcing the page itself cites (claim_findings[5], [6]). Two timeline entries also carry placeholder dates that are wrong by months to nearly a year (claim_findings[2], [16]). The large majority of the page's granular financial, corporate, and on-chain claims were independently confirmed against primary sources (OFAC, Treasury, Elliptic, TRM Labs, OCCRP), which keeps this a revision rather than a denial, but the severity of the sanctions-basis omission and the unresolved custody contradiction warrant a penalty toward the upper end of the minor-issues band.","score_delta":-12,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}