I am not a lawyer and I am not interested in becoming one just so I can post on Wikipedia, so I am not going to spend any more time building up a case. It is my understanding that Wikipedia administrators have an active interest in enforcing the rules and not depend on self-appointed legal deputies to do their work for them.

There's positive evidence that I am not the same person as these two, so I see no reason why I should pretend to have the burden of proof in this matter.  Based on this, I feel sufficient cause for the removal of all claims of sock-puppetry.  If they try to edit war with me, I will revert as often as needed, since this is a matter of libel and vandalism.