The veredict cannot be "Craig cannot prove he is Satoshi". He is the defendant in a case in which COPA claims he is not Satoshi. Burden of proof is on COPA to prove he isn't Satoshi.

For COPA to win, they need a verdict that says "Craig isn't Satoshi”.

If they fail to do so, then the verdict would be "COPA cannot prove Craig isn't Satoshi".

The second scenario doesn't confirm he is, it just says it cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt that he isn't.