...and I think that is the whole point Nokia is exposing by this.

Credibility.

I doubt that getting the device back is as valuable to Nokia as this fellow admitting that he does not have the device. It is a win win for Nokia.

Any "opinion" this fellow offers on any device in the future would be based on what; maybe he has it maybe he doesn't?

In the internet world where this issue actually lives (not the courts), that is like trying to sell unlocked iPhones on EBay without providing pictures.

Maybe you have them, maybe you don't.

Pictures do not prove a thing but it will affect the number of responses your ad receives.

Some have always had doubts about this fellows 'opinion" and have question his motivation in the past.

Others have defended him as some sort of cell phone Deity and doubting his opinion seemed to be treated as blasphemy.

More and more posts like your previous one are now coming to light (thanks). This adds credibility to those who had doubts.

His own contradictory statements on this issue may not change the opinions of those who thought he was some kind of saint but I doubt many more will think so in the future.

I think that is all Nokia expects to regain. The benefit of the doubt.