Space the Scammer

[Krish]

As @Samuel would like me to speak on his behalf to prove to all of you that @Space scammed him and there was no one to be framed here I will post this.

Space's Words, not written by me
-
"Initially the deal was for the kiks bd and ks, providing it was bitcoin and he would go first, I was fine
with that. And was ready to send, he then changes his mind to 470 for @si, still having the mindset of the kik
deal I was not thinking about him being able to pullback. Unfortunately at the moment im only restricted to my laptop
with bluestacks kik and the website instagram.com, so I wasn't able to fully secure with fb etc.) After securing to the most of what I could I sent him the btc

He then exclaims he did not get it, even though it matches his exact address. He then continues to pullback
the ig and swap it and follows through with playing victim here. I was not able to respond quickly due to
being afk, and welp now I am here. Hoorah. " - @Space

That is the statement @Space gave to @Therapy, therapy would be more than willing to confirm this statement. This is @Samuel's and my response to the statement @Space had to give.

I got word about the HF thread @therapy was talking about where @Samuel was accused of scamming @Hope. Going to disprove that right now.
In the HF thread @Hope states that it was pulled back, and samuel said "Sorry" Sorry can mean many things, "Sorry for your loss" "Sorry you didn't secure it" the message "Sorry" Is not evidence that it was samuel.
@Oh has had some owners, any one of those could've pulled it back through a facebook.
Hope's report shows that he was indeed scammed, but hope has no proof that it was actually @Samuel.
Here is solid proof that the screenshot is FAKED by @Space.
http://bitref.com/1CWL6MnYSqEs1tThfvcyEZbykXKwgGHuaE

It clearly says the last transaction is on TUESDAY. So therefore the screenshot is 100% fake and @Space did scam.
You can double check yourselves that this is indeed the transaction address in the "Proof" that space gave.

---

If you guys have any questions, feel free to ask.

I know Leo, and I know he didn't scam. He's not a scammer.
Seems like legitimate proof to me, but I'm not a moderator so I don't make the final decision.

I don't think he would scam, and if you get a transaction link I think that would be sufficient proof for an unban.

Space didn't scam lmao, sam is just playing the fucking victim, #FreeSpace2015

 

[Ambien]

My gangs from Six Double O, Six Double O.

 

[Coder]

Not taking sides in any of this.. however, if the account was unsafe and had many owners then it should of never been sold to Hope in the first place. Hope only had the account for a few days? If thats the case Samuel should pay back hope/refund him imo. Hope should of had plenty of time to wait before swapping and not feel like it was going to get taken back.

 

[Hurt]

Look at the amount that Samuel recieved on the 28th, that's $465 USD.
The deal was for $470 USD and that's a $5 difference. Could be a coincidence, but I find it unlikely.
Also, how likely is it that 2 people assume Samuel scammed around the same time? I don't suppose you think they're conspiring against him?

Space has been scammed in the past, and I know him well. He isn't a scammer and I truthfully believe that he was scammed again.

EDIT: Wait a minute, I'm an idiot. Give me a moment to go over the evidence and re-evaluate this statement.
DO NOT QUOTE ME ON ANY OF THIS, I AM RE-EVALUATING MYSELF.

 

[nokia]

Not reading the thing but the subject for the thread is funny lol.

 

[Krish]

Federal Rule of Evidence 404(a) provides: "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion."

Read more: http://www.thelegalintelligencer.co...vidence-to-Prove-Discrimination#ixzz3Z2yiRRHD

Given that this is not viable evidence, I would just like to point out the issues that @Space was having a stressful IRL experience. This could psychologically have some stress and impact the ability to make rational decisions. If @Envy or @Monster could give their feedback that'd be great.

 

[Ambien]

Look at the amount that Samuel recieved on the 28th, that's $465 USD.
The deal was for $470 USD and that's a $5 difference. Could be a coincidence, but I find it unlikely.
Also, how likely is it that 2 people assume Samuel scammed around the same time? I don't suppose you think they're conspiring against him?

Space has been scammed in the past, and I know him well. He isn't a scammer and I truthfully believe that he was scammed again.

I agree, and I also agree that he's been scammed on here and offsite a lot, I doubt he'd ever scam someone.

 

[Krish]

Look at the amount that Samuel recieved on the 28th, that's $465 USD.
The deal was for $470 USD and that's a $5 difference. Could be a coincidence, but I find it unlikely.
Also, how likely is it that 2 people assume Samuel scammed around the same time? I don't suppose you think they're conspiring against him?

Space has been scammed in the past, and I know him well. He isn't a scammer and I truthfully believe that he was scammed again.

1. "Look at the amount that Samuel recieved on the 28th, that's $465 USD."

That is not a received payment. That is a sent payment from Samuel.

2. "Also, how likely is it that 2 people assume Samuel scammed around the same time?"

You can not base your logic on hoe many people assume something.

 

[Ambien]

but w.e we'll see what the moderators decide

 

[Krish]

Not taking sides in any of this.. however, if the account was unsafe and had many owners then it should of never been sold to Hope in the first place. Hope only had the account for a few days? If thats the case Samuel should pay back hope/refund him imo. Hope should of had plenty of time to wait before swapping and not feel like it was going to get taken back.

Samuel is not entitled to refund if it is not his fault it was pulled back. Hope was at a loss. @Samuel has evidence of a past owner admitting to pulling it back but will not disclose it to anyone other than me until it is absolutely requested due to it being snitching.

---

but w.e we'll see what the moderators decide

The moderators have decided that @Space scammed, that is why he's banned.

 

[Hurt]

I agree, and I also agree that he's been scammed on here and offsite a lot, I doubt he'd ever scam someone.

1. "Look at the amount that Samuel recieved on the 28th, that's $465 USD."

That is not a received payment. That is a sent payment from Samuel.

2. "Also, how likely is it that 2 people assume Samuel scammed around the same time?"

You can not base your logic on hoe many people assume something.

I realize you probably starting typing this before I edited my post, but please look at my edited post. I realized last minute that was a sent payment, so I'm looking everything over again.
As for your second point, I entirely believe you can base logic on how many others are assuming something.

For example:
Somebody robs a store, and witnesses are being shown pictures of possible suspects.
Every witness chooses Suspect #2, while none choose #1. Which is the most likely to be the criminal?
The main lead is Suspect #2 because he has more fingers pointed at him.

 

[Krish]

umm space is banned nigga who gives a fuck

There are some people who still believe he was framed. I'm taking the time to kindly disprove them.

 

[Cybering]

#DramaAlert someone scammed someone, a mvp got banned and I still don't care

 

[Ambien]

Samuel is not entitled to refund if it is not his fault it was pulled back. Hope was at a loss. @Samuel has evidence of a past owner admitting to pulling it back but will not disclose it to anyone other than me until it is absolutely requested due to it being snitching.

---

The moderators have decided that @Space scammed, that is why he's banned.

---

I meant on this so called evidence being brought up now.

 

[Krish]

I realize you probably starting typing this before I edited my post, but please look at my edited post. I realized last minute that was a sent payment, so I'm looking everything over again.
As for your second point, I entirely believe you can base logic on how many others are assuming something.

For example:
Somebody robs a store, and witnesses are being shown pictures of possible suspects.
Every witness chooses Suspect #2, while none choose #1. Which is the most likely to be the criminal?
The main lead is Suspect #2 because he has more fingers pointed at him.

That is different, a lead is different than a conviction.

For example, everyone said the earth was flat at one point, it was then proven false. The amount of people that assume one thing is insignificant without full evidence.

 

[Coder]

Samuel is not entitled to refund if it is not his fault it was pulled back. Hope was at a loss. @Samuel has evidence of a past owner admitting to pulling it back but will not disclose it to anyone other than me until it is absolutely requested due to it being snitching.

---

The moderators have decided that @Space scammed, that is why he's banned.

---

Whether it is against the rules or not.. samuel should of made sure the account was secured and safe before selling it to hope. At the very least it is unprofessional. I believe there is even a new feature in the instagram app that allows you to see and remove any attached facebooks. 

EDIT: and once again.. I'm not trying to bash on anyone. I don't really take sides on this shit anymore.. I'm just giving my 2 cents on this.

 

[Krish]

I agree, and I also agree that he's been scammed on here and offsite a lot, I doubt he'd ever scam someone.

Please look at post number 6 on this thread where I address the fact that he's been scammed often as motivation to turn into a scammer.

 

[Hurt]

That is different, a lead is different than a conviction.

For example, everyone said the earth was flat at one point, it was then proven false. The amount of people that assume one thing is insignificant without full evidence.

Yeah but for now he is the #1 lead. He has two people accusing him of scamming, during the same week.
Seems a little suspicious. I think the HF scam report should also be taken into consideration as now it seems more likely that Space was scammed.
The likelihood of him being scammed is higher due to this second person accusing Sam of scamming.

Sure, Space may be lying and he may be the scammer, but for now there is more evidence against Sam than Leo.

 

[Krish]

Whether it is against the rules or not.. samuel should of made sure the account was secured and safe before selling it to hope. At the very least it is unprofessional. I believe there is even a new feature in the instagram app that allows you to see and remove any attached facebooks. 

You can not fully blame Samuel, this is like purchasing a car and it breaking down on you. You can not FULLY blame the car company, it is partly your fault for not checking and making sure 100%.

---

Yeah but for now he is the #1 lead. He has two people accusing him of scamming, during the same week.
Seems a little suspicious. I think the HF scam report should also be taken into consideration as now it seems more likely that Space was scammed.
The likelihood of him being scammed is higher due to this second person accusing Sam of scamming.

Sure, Space may be lying and he may be the scammer, but for now There is more evidence against Sam than Leo.

1. "The likelihood of him being scammed is higher due to this second person accusing Sam of scamming"

You can not go by "Oh he's a king, he must be telling the truth" we're not in the 16th century anymore.

2. "There is more evidence against Sam than Leo."

Please show me this evidence against Sam? Are you talking about the screenshot in space's statement?
Space lied about sending the bitcoin, you can see all the transactions to-from that BTC address space supposedly sent his bitcoin to.

Evidence being disproven: http://bitref.com/1CWL6MnYSqEs1ThfvcyEZbyXKkwgHuaE

 

[nokia]

i agree with this nigga @trilogy he just doesn't give a fuck as does many, lol.