Now wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
When a threat to go to the press was made, the charity changed it's mind as it feared retaliation from other donors.
Why would a charity fear "retaliation" from other donors if it showed someone to be a deadbeat?
Wouldn't it be the deadbeat who should fear retaliation from other donors; at the least, it would be a massive public-relations disaster for the deadbeat.
The big guy needs to elucidate further; there's a missing connection here, something I'm not getting.