Rossi Responds to IH’s Motion to Dismiss in Court Case

Quote from Alan Smith

Mary, Just to be clear, I don't mind you calling Rossi a fraud, since you do it so often it must make you moist. The truth of your allegations may or may not be revealed in a court of law. And Rossi is a principal actor in this drama and resident in the same country you are. In the event of him winning his case he can, if he wishes, reach out and sue you for damages. However, I do object to you imputing complicity in an unproven allegation of fraud on the part of the various Professors and Mats Lewan and others who have crossed Rossi's path in the past. They are not currently involved in legal proceedings and live in other jurisdictions, making legal action on their part difficult and costly. They might consider it more fruitful to sue the owners of this forum (who are closer to home) for allowing such comments to remain published. Therefore such allegations will always be removed -when I see them- whatever the result of the case in Miami.

Alan, if you believe someone posting on an internet forum claiming they believe someone is a fraud (especially regarding a subject matter that most of the world considers pseudoscience or fantasy) will put them in a position of being sued, you have MUCH to learn about the laws in the US as well as how the internet works. Saying you believe someone is acting fraudulent does not fall under the protective umbrella of defamation...just as saying you believe someone is an idiot would not either. Also malice must be proven via tangible losses due to the presumed defamation. Would your personal statement of IH being the Antichrist not fit into this same category for IH to sue you for damages? The implication that IH is the Antichrist would be taken no differently than someone saying they believe Rossi is fraud...what say you on this tit-for-tat Alan?

Quote from Timar

axil: I guess such negative feedback on the plant performance would have been kind of hard to reconcile with IH simultanously raising >100 million dollars in investment money using the said 1MW plant...

I don't get what you mean. What does contractually required cooperation have to do with raising money?

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Axil - from where do you get such insight and knowledge?

By reading the licence agreement and from my work experience.

Quote from JedRothwell

So . . . I guess you are not a fly on the wall and you don't work for Rossi. We can rule that out. Because you are not aware of all these things. Yet despite this unawareness, you see to have clairvoyant knowledge of Rossi and I.H.'s business, to wit --

It seem to you how? On what basis? As Dewey asked, where do you get such knowledge? ESP?

In general, if a contract calls for contractual requirement A, B, and C to be produced during a test and the systems integrator(IH) latter accuses the OEM(Rossi) that he has not meet one or more of those requirements, the Systems Integrator must have had to document that failure to meet the requirement during the test; i.e. requirement A was not meet. Each of the failed days with its date out of the 400 would need to be documented. If this daily document status is not prepared, it is assumed that the test was passed on that given day.

IH has not documented that the 50 out of 400 day requirement was not meet in detail. I have not seen that failure to meet the daily performance requirement properly documented which asserts that the requirement was not met as presented by IH in the evidence so far provided.

Rossi might have failed to meet the daily performance requirement, but IH has not show documented proof that Rossi has not met that performance requirement; at least that I have seen.

In general, contemporaneous written evidence is far more effective as proof than blanket verbal assertions after the fact.

Quote from axil

IH has not documented that the 350 out of 400 day requirement was not meet ub detail.

Again, how do you know this? Do you work for the NSA? Do you have a spy in I.H.? You keep telling us what I.H. has or has not done. Where are you getting all this detailed information?!?

Quote from JedRothwell

Again, how do you know this? Do you work for the NSA? Do you have a spy in I.H.? You keep telling us what I.H. has or has not done. Where are you getting all this detailed information?!?

I know this because I have not seen this evidence yet. When I see it, I will believe it if this written evidence produced during the test is judged to be valid and admissible. In my judgement, it is reasonable to assume that this evidence does not exist. IH should have already provided the court contemporaneous written evidence that Rossi has not meet one or more requirements defined by the licence agreement. If IH has this evidence, why won't they show it?

Lack of payment is not evidence that Rossi has not meet the requirements of the licence agreement, IMHO.

Quote from axil

I know this because I have not seen this evidence yet. When I see it, I will believe it if this written evidence is judged to be valid and admissible. In my judgement, it is reasonable to assume that this evidence does not exist.

This makes absolutely no sense Axil...this is material that will come out at the time of the court case, not now. I am not saying this as a jab, but I think those on Planet Rossi have gotten so used to Rossi speaking out daily about the case, that they somehow are thinking this is normal behavior before a court case. Just like any capable lawyer would tell a client, IH is releasing what makes sense timing wise moving forward to the lawsuit brought against them. They really have nothing to prove to any of us...just as us skeptics are told that Rossi owes us no proof. You guys are really picking at straws with this stuff.

Quote from axil

I know this because I have not seen this evidence yet.

Correct me if I am wrong . . . But you seem to be saying that it does not exist because you have not seen it. The corollary would be that you have seen everything that exists. You are omniscient.

There are trillions of documents on earth that you have not seen. That does not mean they do not exist. I am sure there are thousands of documents at I.H. you have not seen. However, they still exist.

Quote from Alan Smith

I would say that the Anti-Christ is a totally imaginary being with no objective basis in law or fact.

But in your frame of reference regarding defamation, speaking of an individual or entity as the "Anti-Christ" in the context presented, would absolutely be inferred as such - defamation. You can't have it both ways...if someone saying they believe Rossi is acting fraudulently puts them in jeopardy of defamation law suit, then your insinuation would follow suit. We obviously have some disagreements, but I will say I believe you to be a man of much intelligence (I am not being sarcastic), so this will just become circular. I will drop it at this point.

EDIT: In all honesty, I believe everyone on both sides is worked up lately by frustration of the E-Cat can being kicked down the road...for who knows how much longer.

I'm fearful that Axil has entered the axis of orbit for Planet Rossi. I hope he has enough phuel to break free on the next burn window. One of the Planet of the Rossis troglodytes may have a tractor beam on his axx. His worst posting string in years - not looking good for the Ax-man tonight. But hey - tomorrow is a new day and every day is a new day on Planet Rossi.

Quote from JedRothwell

Correct me if I am wrong . . . But you seem to be saying that it does not exist because you have not seen it. The corollary would be that you have seen everything that exists. You are omniscient.

There are trillions of documents on earth that you have not seen. That does not mean they do not exist. I am sure there are thousands of documents at I.H. you have not seen. However, they still exist.

Jed has gone through many scenarios that are formed to show Rossi has not met the requirements of the contract. Those attempts to discredit Rossi's claims to have met all contractual requirements are in vain unless those expectations were duly recorded during the test and authenticated by the signature of the ERV and/or Rossi which shows that either both or either one were aware of the issues of contention that Rossi was not fulfilling the requirements of the contract.

These suspicions cannot just be in the minds of the officers of IH but must be recorded during the test on paper and verifiable in terms of date produced and witnessed by the ERV and or Rossi. This is what notaries are for, to witness the validity of the dates and signatures on documents.

Rossi might have not produced any LENR activity during the test, but that fact must be recorded as evidence during the test. IH had the responsibility to inform Rossi that he was not compliant with the requirements of the test when the test was underway. This non compliance issue was addressed and was called out in section 5 of the licence agreement.

Axil - what if he used a mis-spec'd flowmeter?

Quote from axil

These suspicions cannot just be in the minds of the officers of IH but must be recorded during the test on paper and verifiable in terms of date produced and witnessed by the ERV and or Rossi. This is what notaries are for, to witness the validity of the dates and signatures on documents.

Quote from axil

Rossi might have not produced any LENR activity during the test, but that fact must be recorded as evidence during the test.

Fine! Great. Good. We get it. But you said, "I know this because I have not seen this evidence yet." You, Axil have not seen it. Therefore it does not exist?

Suppose there is documented evidence at I.H. that Rossi did not produce LENR activity, but YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT. It still exists. Right? You have not seen trillions of documents in the world. Yet they exist. Right? Do we agree on that?

Or did you never learn object permanence as a baby?

Quote from Dewey Weaver

I'm fearful that Axil has entered the axis of orbit for Planet Rossi. I hope he has enough phuel to break free on the next burn window. One of the Planet of the Rossis troglodytes may have a tractor beam on his axx. His worst posting string in years - not looking good for the Ax-man tonight. But hey - tomorrow is a new day and every day is a new day on Planet Rossi.

The time to make the case against Rossi was during the test. This is the time when evidence preparation is most persuasive.

Through gross incompetence on the part of the IH test director and contract administrator if this positions in fact existed at the time during the test which I doubt. Rossi might get away with the con of the century. IH has let you down. As a investor in IH, you should look into this debacle of a situation and act against IH accordingly.

Through gross incompetence, IH does not have the evidence generated during the test to prove that Rossi was scamming IH, if he was in fact doing it. We just don't know, we don't have any valid evidence.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Axil - what if he used a mis-spec'd flowmeter?

Were is the documentation relating to this issue prepared and delivered during the test?

Ax-man - you're up against a master. The Jedo-mind tricks are not tricks at all - you just think they are.

In addition, If you cannot break free from the P.R. tractor beam then you'll need to do your de-orbit burn by 0300 Zulu - that will ensure that you land close to the overlord's caldron. If you have enough gas and power to get out of there then the interplanetary monitoring system will let us know where you are and if you're okay or not tomorrow. No matter what, you need to take a shower. Hanging around the Planet of the Rossis types just makes you feel dirty. I wish you the best of luck in breaking free and getting cleaned up overnight.