Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-03T02:53:59.156Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"6e0d7808-17b4-4d32-be8a-b8698920809c","new_score":71,"page_slug":"ninamo","prev_score":83,"reason":"The reviewer's stated disputed_pct of 25% places this page in the review_revise band. The single directly disputed claim (claim_findings[0]: theft date April 27 vs confirmed April 28) is a minor peripheral error rather than a core allegation failure. However, four high-priority coverage gaps — most critically the structural incoherence gap flagging that the page is formatted as a crypto-token investigation while its actual subject is a named individual suspect in a major Bitcoin theft — substantially increase the revision weight. Additionally, claim_findings[9] and claim_findings[6] identify source mischaracterizations where informational pages (IC3, SEC tip portal) are presented as searchable enforcement databases, which is a credibility issue for the methodology sections. The core identification of Nina/Mo and W0rk as suspects (claim_findings[1-4]) is confirmed by multiple independent Tier 1 and Tier 2 sources and does not require revision. The page's summary and Sections 2-4 need to be restructured to reflect the actual investigation subject.","score_delta":-12,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}