[pyalot2]

You know, I saw that video when it came out (also known as the Roger hostage video). And somehow, strangely, it didn't give any more confidence in Gox.

Yes, that video looks like Roger is held at gunpoint by his captors forced to read a statement. Obviously, that's not what happened. However I believe that Roger had a choice of how to deliver his statement. And obviously, if he had seen something to suggest that there would be liquidity problems, or if he was unconvinced, he couldn't have said so. Gox would've probably sued him in the ensuing bank run.

Still, he went there, looked at it, and had to get the news out. So how to do it in a way, that doesn't make Gox sue him? Pretty much exactly how Linus did admit that NSA has approached him. Do it in a way to leave you least open to being sued, while still getting the message across.

And that's exactly how many interpreted this statement of Roger.

[tlrobinson]

If he was unconvinced why would he have had to make a statement at all?

[pyalot2]

Because it was known he was there. It would have looked very bad indeed if Roger went to Gox and didn't release a statement.