Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist
If Chris can prove that the was getting freerolled, then he should not pay.
If Jason Young can not prove that this "bookie" really existed and Jason owed a lot of money to other people at the same time, then Chris should not pay.
Absolutely, positively, 100% THIS!
This is not about Chris refusing to pay Jason because of the latter's personal debts to others.
This is about Chris strongly suspecting that he was being freerolled, and this "scammer bookie" actually being Jason himself.
The burden of proof is on Jason now to name this bookie and provide proof that he really paid the guy on behalf of Chris.
Simply saying, "I paid this guy $20k for Chris, and now the guy ran off, so Chris owes me" is a bunch of garbage, unless Jason can prove he really paid the money.
Jason, if this bookie really scammed everyone and disappeared, you should have no problem naming him and providing proof that you paid him. If you can't, Chris has every right in the world to refuse to pay you, because it looks too much like a scam.
If for some reason you are afraid to out this bookie publicly, there are many trustworthy people who you can give the information to privately, and they can post their findings. I will volunteer for this if you want.
If Jason does prove that he paid this bookie at the time he claims (and that the bookie exists), then Chris definitely owes the money, regardless of Jason's other personal problems at the moment.
Right now, Chris should pay nothing and wait for proof.