I did verify
Peanutswar had a correct message.
This is Peanutswar, OCT 2 2020, bc1qh45r8qdp5zqf5cux77sq0k3gmjdljv4jdac0n0
This means he owns the key. but I recommending he remakes using a common format.
No, you didn't verify anything and it doesn't mean he owns the key... Your image is telling you what "address" that message+signature combo would need to be "valid"... however, as the address being "staked" is obviously "bc1qh45r8qdp5zqf5cux77sq0k3gmjdljv4jdac0n0", the screenshot you took is proof of nothing.
You can test this yourself... Once you have a "signature", you can put whatever message you want and it will tell you what the "expected" address is...
For instance... here is the "demo" address+message+signature:
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is an example of a signed message.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1HZwkjkeaoZfTSaJxDw6aKkxp45agDiEzN
HHXLKIFZ7LWR5YZ2rbScJ7IMkbPEz58dAVGc38uyGfSEX2mR/tm82QVqSNjcSrgR3MVGhyztU8lTFBgXjmQCDPQ=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
permalinkNow, I can take that signature, remove the address... and then use
any message I like and it will give an address... However, this does NOT "verify" anything.