I remember seeing these emails when this story broke. IAAL, and it looked to me like this is a colorable claim (without predicting its eventual outcome). It was weird to me that journalists and tech commentators dismissed it so readily at that time.
1) The guy said it took so long for him to come forward because he "forgot" about the contract/emails.
2) Selling 50% of the company for $2k seems like an odd move... I don't know my facebook history perfectly, but didn't Zuck have a business partner with a lot of money already?
Being convicted of a felony does not make you forever an untrustworthy lout, nor a compulsive, criminal liar. It means you committed a crime once and were prosecuted for it.
That's what we call a "straw man argument"-- I never claimed otherwise. I offered it up as a data point (among several) that caused people to dismiss the claim. Statistically speaking, I imagine people who've been convicted of fraud are liklier to commit fraud than those who haven't been.
Doesn't change the fact that it's a colorable claim. It doesn't look to me like any of the defenses you list would lead to summary judgment based on the facts.
Its really easy to fake some emails, and it seems wierd to wait seven years to come forward with the claim. In addition the person isn't exactly the most trustworthy.
