So a scammer and a fraudster, and a civil judgement isn't "criminal" behavior just because, in your opinion, it wasn't tried in criminal court? You are playing semantics here worse than the most ridiculous hyperbole I've seen.
No, a civil judgment isn't "criminal" because it's not a criminal judgment. This is the definition, by law. You can play semantics and debate whether you can call someone a "criminal" even when they're not a "convicted criminal". But people keep calling Bruce a 'convict' in the mortgage case, which just isn't true. The same way OJ Simpson was never convicted of murder. It's not a matter of semantics. I'm not saying this exonerates Bruce, but misinformation doesn't exactly help people's cases.