There is a good post from Greg Maxwell about this here: https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/5215128.msg53907439#msg53907439. That entire thread is worth a read, but the stuff specifically regarding Andresen starts from about page 6 onwards.

The bottom line is "We don't know for sure". Either Andresen is incompetent and allowed CSW to fool him - and given CSW "proved" his signature on a computer he provided, using a copy of Electrum he provided which was not verified, while connect to a WiFi network in a location of his choosing, there were many opportunities to easily fake a valid signature - or Andresen is compromised and was lying for his own benefit, be that money, influence, coercion, whatever.

Regardless of what happened between CSW and Andresen, if there is one thing we absolutely know for sure, it's that CSW is a fraud, a criminal, and not Satoshi.

I don't believe there is any known not provably forged evidence of him having touched Bitcoin prior to 2013.  Or did I miss something?

I have met and interacted with Gavin Andresen and he seems to me to be a decent and intelligent person. Even decent and intelligent people can be fooled, so I feel that any animosity towards him is undeserved. Note also that he is not the only person that was fooled by CSW.

My belief is that Gavin probably felt that his certification was not really important because CSW stated that he was going to show the proof to the public. Then, when CSW's public proof turned out to be bogus, Gavin's certification led to his undoing.

@nutildah,

That may actually check out. This forums wasn't originally under "bitcointalk.org" but "bitcoin.org/smf". The change happened by 2011 and Satoshi (the real one) isn't around since December 2010.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3;sa=showPosts;start=0

And if he just lost 14 BTC, then it wasn't much. I lost 15 not at MtGox but due to the hack, I'd some change at mybitcoin.com under the same password as MtGox (I'd a big fight with Jed and lost confidence in his service way before he even sold it to MagicalTux).
I remember also was M'Tux always giving "lectures about password security", and turns out we found after the hack it was single round MD5 hashes... WTG!  

That's not the part I was referring to -- it was the part where he said that the content of his posts had been dramatically altered (outside of the auto-substitution of bitcoin.org for bitcointalk.org links)... He's basically insinuating that the content of posts had been changed for nefarious purposes when in fact there is no evidence of this.

Oh buddy. You have some catching up to do. Start here:

https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1220264990810300416

Then here:

https://modernconsensus.com/commentary/the-case-against-craig-wright-part-i-2009-2011/


OK so we're more on the same page than I previously suspected.

@nutildah
Well, compared to the next snapshot one year later, he was tampering with dates at his blog:

https://web.archive.org/web/20151003011245/http://gse-compliance.blogspot.com.au/2009_01_04_archive.html

The January 8th 2009 post wasn't there in 2014. So we can assume the blog entries timestamp and content was just as fake as his claims.

@odolvlobo yes, it's irrelevant indeed.

So, sorry to think he was around longer.

Nope, I didn't know it was. Still the same guy behind it since day 1 it was registered, over 10 years ago.
Also first Bitcoin casino owner. 
And coming back to show a small project I made for people's heirs, made me go on a nostalgia rampage. Like Dwdollar's first Bitcoin Exchange, bitcoinmarket.com (launched by 1st February 2011)

Absolutely, but I am still left wondering "How!?"

The story we have is that the verification was done on a computer which one of CSW's associates "purchased" that day. Why? Why could they not use the computer Andresen had with him? A "factory seal" proves absolutely nothing. There is no way Gavin does not know this. Even one of the largest hardware wallet manufacturers - Ledger - does not use tamper proof seals because they prove nothing. They did not verify the copy of Electrum they installed on this computer. This is "Basic usage 101". There are probably over ten thousand posts on this forum telling newbies to verify Electrum before using it. But Andresen of all people didn't know to do this? I just don't buy it. And then he wasn't allowed to keep the laptop or the USB drive afterwards? This is like a magician who refuses to let you examine his obviously rigged deck of cards.

There are just so many flaws in this set up that I don't understand how someone with Gavin's knowledge fell for it.