I wasn't aware that someone was attempting to use the authenticity (or not) of the Shroud in a criminal case . . . which is the only case in which your statement would apply.
A common occurrence since the death of Christ. Many "Christian Relics" were fabricated and many monasteries and aristocrats charged the faithful money to gaze or touch these fakes.
The existence of counterfeits does not therefore prove that all things are counterfeit.
Will it make all Christians, more Christian if it is, indeed, the shroud that Christ's body was wrapped after his crucifixion?
Nope. But it will be yet another proof that one can add to their apologetic, if indeed it proves to be true.
Faith is the belief in that which is unseen, unproven.
It annoys me enough when nonbelievers use that passe definition of faith, let alone a professing Christian who should know better. Peter and the other Apostles knew for a fact whether or not Jesus had risen from the dead. They saw Him, touched Him, and even ate with Him. Yet they still had to have faith. Why?
Because faith is not the intellectual belief in something contrary to the facts or despite a lack of facts. It is choosing to trust God and His provision for our sin, choosing to trust His promises even when their fulfillment seems a distant and unlikely thing, choosing to trust Him to know what He's doing when He tells us to do something and obey Him.
It has not shown to poses any supernatural power.
Historical artifacts are only of interest to you if they have some magical power that you can exploit?
The shroud may actually be the burial cloth of Christ, but its existence, like the Holy Grail and pieces of the True Cross or Peter's Bones is only memorabilia, not faith.
Which is all the interest I see anyone here taking in it, so who exactly are you trying to correct?
Well, certainly not the likes of you. Seems that you know all that is worth knowing and that which you don't know is of no consequence. The Shroud is all yours.