No, why would I? He's not on DT.

Let's see:
"Helped this user" doesn't mean the user is unlikely to scam anyone.
"Done a few designs for" doesn't mean the user is unlikely to scam anyone.
"Done a couple of photograph edits and design jobs ~ even offering to pay before hand" doesn't clearly say if any funds were risked.
"Had a small deal with this user ~ I am giving a trust because he was easy to communicate and deal with", for $15 which wasn't even risked.
"Worked with ~ for some time now and he is a nice campaign manager" sounds acceptable, the campaign manager could have not paid thus funds were probably risked. But I can't be sure without a Reference link proving it.
"willingly borrowed me a large amount of funds without a collateral" doesn't mean the user could have scammed, it's the other way around.

See the list: it's pretty safe, mostly selecting users who are on DT1 already.

Of course Trust inclusions or exclusions are based on "an average" of all feedback. I usually don't agree with all feedback someone left. But you're comparing 1 (in my opinion abusive) negative feedback from Mia Chloe to DT-members with many good negatives and one abuse one. My Trust exclusions are well documented, and I don't easily exclude users. That's why I posted my opinion hoping for improvement. But after seeing those positive feedbacks, combined with the emotional negative feedback, I don't think this user belongs on DT.