Do you think Hans Is cheating?

That would most certainly be an ethics violation, but I do not think it would fall under the same realm as cheating.  That would likely go before Peter Heine Neilson's favorite committee to figure out what to do.

Yeah but weirder things happened. Either that or he has a coach with a similiar accent.

I didn't say it would be necessarily actionable.  I said it would be cheating, and I stand by that assessment.

The accent is nothing.  As someone who has lived overseas, I can tell you that people change their speech patterns to make things understandable for those they are speaking to most often.  The "accent" rebounds quickly when the audience changes.  I don't know why the accent is even being brought up.

Decades ago when people were ripping Madonna for having picked up a British accent, they didn't understand how this works, either.  It's a provincial American bias.  One of my siblings lives in London, and thus has a bit of an accent now.

I will leave you with Mark Twain's quote:

"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime."

All that talk about his accent was the toxic side of social media coming out. It has nothing whatsoever to do with cheating, it is just a nasty personal attack. It is hate.

There are interviews of Magnus Carlsen where he says he is not a good loser, that he hates losing and doesn't deal with it so well.

When he lost to David Howells as a kid, he did not speak to him again for 7 years. Against Niemann it was even worse for him because he fully expected to beat him and then after he lost Niemann went on camera and said "he should be embarrassed because he lost to an idiot like me." And Niemann doesn't really think of himself as an idiot, but privately Carlsen does. So hearing this was too much for him to take.

And because he knew that Niemann had cheated online in the past, he knew that no evidence would be needed to make his life hell. All was needed was a few private words to the tournament officials and a video clip of Jose Mourinho and the internet mob would do all the rest. He also knew that the deal with chess.com was not finalized and that chess.com would not want to take a position that risked jeopardizing that deal. So chess.com was put into a difficult situation where it just wanted the whole thing to quietly go away.  

If he were cheating he would have been caught with an ear piece or some other device or accomplice by now.

This has set off a bunch of wild conspiracy theories which by definition cannot be disproven. No matter how many checks he does, people will come up with ever crazier theories of how has has evaded security for so many years.

For many people conspiracy theories are addictive because it is much more interesting than believing he is just a bloke who made a huge mistake by cheating when he was a kid, then worked very hard to improve and gave up his social life completely just chess, chess, chess to get better. Then he played a game where Carlsen played so poorly that Niemann was able to make 3 mistakes and still win a game.

Several amateur players have cheated against Magnus online and he dealt with it by subtle insinuation such as "he played very very very well for his level". That was enough for the audience to understand what he was thinking and came off more classy than making a direct cheating accusation.

However this situation with Niemann is different. It is a much bigger story and everyone knows the identity of the person he is accusing. Most people didn't even know who Hans was before the tournament started and now they know him as a "cheater".

Probably not, but I can't know for sure. Innocent until proven guilty. Also, he passed through all the metal detection, all eyes were on him, there was delay in broadcast and yet nothing against the rules was caught by anyone.

Caruana's prep for the 2018 match was revealed by a video, and Carlsen (wo confirmed he knew about it) did not hesitate to enter that line.

Cheating is such a vague term.  I say once a cheater always a cheater. Especially after only a few years. After maybe 30 or 40 years and he has proven he has changed his ways then MAYBE I could see a reformed heart. But after two years and claiming to now suddenly be honest? No, I don't see it happening.

But miracles happen. And 30 years from now we'll see. 

That is not circumstantial evidence. The only kind of circumstantial evidence that could exist would be a statistical analysis of his moves showing strong correlation between different engines or a cheating device being found with his fingerprints. Past behavior is not circumstantial evidence. Even if that behavior is a pattern and not a one time thing.

Also, at least one of his bans was a joke ban because he was joking about giving out diamond memberships. I have no information on any bans he may have received on lichess.

I support Hans Niemann!

I do not believe he cheated. That Tweet of Carlsen was very bad sportsmanship!

And?

These are not the same thing.

Correct. In the Caruana/Carlsen case, it's a proven fact. In The Carlsen/Niemann case, it's only speculations by uninvolved and uninformed people.

I thought Hans was quite articulate in the interview for a 19 year old under a lot of pressure, and if he wins the tourney, we're gonna get Magnus down to present his 1st placed trophy.

I've got the bigmoneyK ontacts to get it done.

No, it's not the same because ethically your example is not the same as the hypothetical being posed.  Caruana knew about the accidental leak and could have changed his plans.  Carlsen was beneficiary recipient of the leak but did not receive it clandestinely, nor did he solicit it.