Caught in the act...?

Screen caps from a twitter user asking John McAfee to review their coin (Enigma) seem to catch John McAfee in the act of asking for payment in exchange for favourable coverage. Here are the screen caps in question: ![IMG_9036.JPG](https://steemitimages.com/DQmYnHq5N2Xz4YUJDQBXo8tjeNsKz1CXcfrrKUTqEa5jEEn/IMG_9036.JPG) ![IMG_9035.JPG](https://steemitimages.com/DQmSHVyirX9RjD1DUgpZdHx7xY6QDrSBggAnpvYoBm38DpS/IMG_9035.JPG)

A pathetic coverup...?

Instead of apologising for being exposed for an apparent lack of unethics, John McAfee blames a fake account and then presented what appears to be a fabricated screen cap of the offending account - but the details reveal that the image apprears to have been manipulated (eg, photoshopped). Notice the details; ![IMG_9039.PNG](https://steemitimages.com/DQmYr3VStts9kKVocV9ywFptfuM2uLXLwPkt6mKtqrXnAxz/IMG_9039.PNG) John's account is VERIFIED & has a lowercase 'o' in the address -> @officialmcafee - the SAME address as the one Notice John did NOT claim that the messages were fake - but that the PM's (private messages) were between the Enigma advocate & a 'fake account'.

If it Looks Like Evidence & it Smells Like Evidence...

Now look at the apparently altered image John posts compared to the ACTUAL fake account details. You will notice the lowercase 'o' in the apparently altered image compared to the uppercase 'O' in the fake (fan) account. ![IMG_9049.PNG](https://steemitimages.com/DQma9PA478JFHYENuRmigQmWqKzXHGwgU8ZeNMSwJFUgrWC/IMG_9049.PNG) This is the image John posted - it appears to have been altered in an attempt to cover up his secretive promotional activities. ![IMG_9050.PNG](https://steemitimages.com/DQmVRPcsPrqLDEUtoup2Rx38xcmvyMaBZu3qjqDKCRVfCRz/IMG_9050.PNG) This is the actual profile - notice the 'O'. Not something which can be changed.

Conclusion.

All the evidence suggests John McAfee PM'd with a promoter of Enigma and asked for 25 BTC in exchange for favourable coverage - and then produced a FAKE profile screen cap of the offending account - but the screen shot does not support the claim and instead, could only have been edited in a pathetic attempt to cover up the apparently unethical practice.

WHAT DO YOU THINK? Tell me in he replies!