|
For libel to be proved it must be shown that the defamation was false. Since Nate tells us if things change, whether he gets a refund or new information comes to light about a product, I trust that he has yet to get his refund. So, where is the falsehood in HIS statement? So far he has told us facts, it isn't his fault that CherryPal hasn't fulfilled its obligations.
I do not know if the few who have only posted to this thread are shills, but the fact that they have such low post counts (single digits) and ONLY post here leads me to not believe them.
|