In reply to Michael Gordon:
Well, you can read the information for yourself: http://www.pioletsdor.net/presse/2017/forum/Annapurna-2013-Steck.pdf
And a related article in French: https://www.pasquer-voyages.com/single-post/Ueli-Steck-est-il-un-imposteur-...
Regardless of what you decide after reading all that, the fact is that, particularly in light of his Shishapangma claim, there were simply too many gaps and contradictions for most of the jury to award him the PdO for Annapurna.
If you truly dig into it, put it all together, and compare it with other ascents and situations, the weight of circumstantial evidence becomes pretty overwhelming, particularly for the Shisha climb - I have no strong personal opinion on the Annapurna climb.