The way I see it.... (NO ONE has to agree with me. This is just where my head is at.)
Putting aside the possible legalities of it all...Just going by what we have been able to SEE, concerning
both parties, I'm not convinced who is really who and who to believe.
When I thought Leslie was Chico, talking to herself at Catsfur...I was leaning towards VE's side of the story. (Leslie posted at Catsfur that she was an employee of VE and she was the one that had the phone conversation with Chico. But..IS Leslie really a VE employee? If she is... her posts at Catsfur didn't help VE's reputation. IMHO, of course. Leslie mentioning to mix dry kibble with raw was a biggie for
me. If Leslie, being a company rep, doesn't know not to mix kibble with raw...COULD she have also told Chico to basically starve her cat?
I DID Google a few keywords (days ago) and saw several IDs being used, at several forums, telling the story of a VE rep suggesting a consumer starve their cat in order to get the cat to eat VE's raw food. (Paraphrasing)
I understand a person using more than one ID on the Internet. Even if someone isn't doing creepy things, it IS a good idea.
I understand a person not wanting to use their real name on the Internet as well.
I also understand a person being soooooo pizzed, they slam a company all over the Internet. Not a GOOD idea, but I can understand.
The bottom line is, there is no proof of the exact phone conversation that took place between Chico and Leslie. Chico should "tone it down" for that reason alone. Again..IMHO.
VE DID have this posted on their website:
There are differing
stories as to WHO put it there and why.
For the above reasons...this juror hasn't voted.