Rossi deception from the record

Yikes. Anyway I described accurately what has already happened. At least two people have filed complaints about Rossi with documentation in appropriate state offices in Florida which accepted the complaints. What they do with them remains to be seen. Soon I hope (but doubt). Jed can stick to picayune parsing of definitions if that is what he enjoys. The above are the facts (anyway the ones I know about-- there could be more). And I suspect that there are some angry shareholders in Woodford who will eventually do something about them, not sure what.

Darden placing Rossi under arrest indeed! That would be a great SNL skit. (Saturday Night Live for our non USA'ns.)

ETA: OK, let's pile drive this into the ground for giggles:

Quote

General fraud and other criminal matters:

Please contact the FBI at (202) 324-3000, or online at https://tips.fbi.gov.

Health Care Fraud and Medicare/Medicaid Fraud, and related matters:

Please contact the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector Generalat 1-800-HHS-TIPS or at www.oig.hhs.gov.

Consumer Fraud and Identity Theft:

Please contact the Federal Trade Commission at 1-877-FTC-HELP or 1-877-ID-THEFT, respectively.

Securities Fraud:

Please contact the Securities and Exchange Commission at 1-800-SEC-0330 [email protected]

Email links icon
.

Mail Fraud, Lottery/Sweepstakes Fraud:

Please contact the U.S. Postal Inspection Service at 1-800-372-8347

Internet Fraud and Lottery/Sweepstakes Fraud by Internet:

Please contact the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) at www.ic3.gov.

Disaster-related Fraud:

Please contact the National Center for Disaster Fraud at (877) NCDF GCF (623-3423), fax (225) 334-4707 or [email protected]

Email links icon
.

Correspondence may be sent to:

National Center for Disaster FraudBaton Rouge, LA 70821-4909

State and local fraud matters:

Please contact your local Police Department or State Attorney General's Office

Display More

-- my emphasis

Note the last two lines, Jed. From: https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/report-fraud

Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

Mats Lewan Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax • 9 hours ago
[...]
3. Add to that, that people who have insight in the MW report confirm that the only way to challenge it is by claiming fraud (funny IH won't make it public!).

He's just flat incorrect about that. Jed Rothwell saw what was likely a preliminary report or an excerpt from the report and claimed that it was blatantly bogus (wrong!). Murray questioned Penon in February, apparently without response, and then formally May 25 in writing, and had what was a draft report, it seems, and certainly doubted it without claiming fraud.

However, Lewan has apparently made no effort to understand IH and what they did and are doing. The "ERV report" is not, they claim, an "ERV report," but just the opinion of Penon. The actual contents of that report are irrelevant to their case. "The only way to challenge it is by claiming fraud" is blatantly false! However, lawyers will assert every possibility in an Answer, and what is actually asserted is collusion or the appearance of it. (and an Answer can include contradictory arguments, even, as alternatives.)

And there is the appearance of fraud or the possibility of fraud.

What Lewan completely missing, along with Planet Rossi, is that whether or not the Doral plant produced XE or not is mostly irrelevant to the case, and I don't particularly expect that issue to be presented to the jury. On the face, the legal issue was, from the beginning, and Planet Rossi certainly noticed this!, whether or not Penon certified that it met certain standards. He apparently certified that. From the complaint:

Quote

72. On or about March 29, 2016, the ERV published his final report regarding the operation of the E-Cat Unit during the Guaranteed Performance test. In the ERV's report, the ERV confirmed that the E-Cat Unit had satisfied all of the performance requirements imposed by the License Agreement including, but not limited to, the requirement that the production of energy was at least six (6) times greater than the energy consumed.

From the amended Answer:

Quote

72. Defendants deny that the test referenced in Paragraph 72 was the Guaranteed Performance to be performed under the License Agreement. Defendants admit that on March 29, 2016, Penon sent his final report regarding the operation of the Plant to Darden and Rossi. Defendants state that this report speaks for itself, and therefore deny any allegations in Paragraph 72 inconsistent therewith. Defendants deny that the Plant satisfied all of the performance requirements imposed by the License Agreement; see Ex. 5. Defendants also deny Plaintiffs’ allegations in Paragraph 72 regarding the amount of energy produced by the Plant during the testing period; see Ex. 1. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 72.

So, they refer to the Penon report, but do not provide it. Lewan thinks this is somehow suspicious, but he has not considered consistent IH behavior. IH does not reveal more than is required.

They are not playing a public relations game. Not before this, and not now. They are defending themselves in a lawsuit and they are not required to reveal the Penon report at this point, so they don't. They are entitled to question the conclusions, and they provide a basis for that, Exhibit 5. Exhibit 5 does not prove fraud, rather it raises questions and that there was no response raises questions about Penon's competence or fairness. They have elsewhere faulted Rossi for revealing confidential information, and that report would explicitly be confidential.

Impeaching the report is their third layer of defense, not the primary two. This is all very simple, legally. But some details from the report have probably been revealed in Exhibit 5.

To reiterate the basic defense, was the Doral plant operation a GPT as defined in the agreement as amended? IH has several layers of defense on that issue alone. The first one, which they still assert, is the lack of signatures as required on the Second Amendment. That's probably the weakest of their defenses. The stronger, second part, is that there was no written agreement to the test date signed by all parties. In order to overcome that defense, since it appears that there was no such agreement, Rossi must allege estoppel, that Darden consented to a GPT, and Rossi has not presented any actual evidence of that, rather he presented a series of actions that he called and implied were consent, but that probably weren't. Allowing Penon to measure and even paying Penon to do that would not be consenting to a GPT! It would simply be giving Rossi what he asked for. Did Rossi explicitly ask for a GPT? My guess is, no, he did not. Had he done so, would have alleged it and would have alleged the consent, that's fairly obvious!

The second major layer of defense is that Rossi did not deliver the IP, thus the foundation of the Agreement, and what would be necessary for them to raise the $89 million, failed.

It appears to me that Rossi never understood the legal issues. He imagined that if he could set up what looked like a GPT, it would therefore be a GPT. He apparently had contempt for legal technicalities, as being the concern of snakes and clowns and rich investors trying to steal his secrets. To him, it was morally allowed to trick them, because of their greedy and evil motives. Paranoia can do this to us. It's common.

Quote

He apparently had contempt for legal technicalities, as being the concern of snakes and clowns and rich investors trying to steal his secrets.

What secrets do you think Rossi had that he didn't want snakes etc. to steal?

Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

Mats Lewan Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax • 9 hours ago
[...]

4. Add to that my own experience through these years, and tests that I have assisted.
5. Add to that testimonials that I cannot yet report on.

There is nothing there. He doesn't provide anything from what he has witnessed. And we already have seen massive analysis of what he witnessed, and Lewan knows, I'd think, that there were always questions, unresolved issues, and, as I pointed out, the appearance that Rossi wasn't being straightforward. It seems to me that Lewan is arguing as if the issue is whether or not the Rossi Effect is real.

That is not the legal issue, and it could be real and Rossi could still be a fraud in some way or other. Rather, once we know that Rossi will lie and cheat, on occasion, he cannot be trusted without clear and independent verification. Demonstrations that he ran and controlled -- which is almost everything -- would be unreliable. Has Lewan ever confronted the overflow water issue, from the earliest tests? His comments on criticism are sparse. AII p. 123, raises some questions but does not answer them. On p. 124, he mentioned that he looked at steam flow from a pipe, but provides no details; apparently he convinced himself, but exactly what had he seen? Reading over, AII, again and again, questions multiply, instead of being answered.

Quote from Mary Yugo

ETA: OK, let's pile drive this into the ground for giggles:

Mary Yugo has always displayed a disconnection with real life, maybe that goes with being a fake persona.

To make a complaint to the police that will go anywhere, one must have standing, a personal stake. Rossi has possibly defrauded IH, so IH could file a report if they choose. Filing such reports can create a problem. If the person is arrested and charged, good luck getting any money back from them. I have a case I'm dealing with right now where one of the options is a complaint to licensing agencies. That could cause a lawsuit against the professional involved to be stayed while official actions are considered. And then if the license is removed, there goes the person's ability to pay a judgment.

The implication in Mary's post is that anyone can make a complaint, and, indeed, they can. However, if I were to make a complaint that Rossi defrauded IH, they would want to know if IH is a child or something, so that IH cannot themselves file the complaint. Basically, I have no standing to complain. If I were outraged, as Mary Yugo obviously has been for a long time, that's irrelevant. Rossi owes me no duty and owes Mary Yugo nothing.

As to an IH investor, they also would have no standing; if IH defrauded them, misrepresented the situatino, they would have civil standing for action, probably not criminal. As well, A Woodford investor would not have standing, unless they are claiming misbehavior by Woodoford. Woodford could claim harm from IH, but, as I've stated many times, I doubt that IH misrepresented the situation to Woodford, and it would certainly not be criminal even if they did, unless something was egregiously deceptive, not merely a failure to inform.

There are few exceptions to the issue of standing. If there is a serious public crime, anyone may report. If there is child abuse, anyone may report to the authorities. Indeed, even suspicion of child abuse is reportable and will be investigated.

Quote from Mary Yugo

What secrets do you think Rossi had that he didn't want snakes etc. to steal?

You want me to imagine what a lunatic is thinking? This is Planet Mary Yugo: for someone to believe that someone is out to steal their secrets, there must be "actual secrets."

Mary seems to have no concept that people act, and commonly, based on beliefs that are invented. This affects her opinion on many other issues. Power Balance bracelets -- or cheap knock-offs -- "don't work" if there is no physical effect as shown in double-blind experiments. This is a common pseudoskeptical position, a belief in the primacy of the physical and the discounting of "psychic" effects, where "psychic" merely means "of the mind." As if the mind doesn't exist.

In a way, it doesn't. But Mary's sophistication is low and I won't go into the way in which it does not exist.

When I point out that the bracelets "actually work," she thinks I'm ignorant and stupid and gullible. To really explore this, which has never been possible with Mary, so firm is she in her convictions of complete bogosity, we would need to look at what "work" means, and how the effect exists and is known. Instead, that Power Balance bracelets are commonly sold using a misleading demonstration places a fraud in a different place and with different implications. Specifically, persuading people to buy what can be made very cheaply at high prices. Yet for some people, the whole thing is an amusement. If they are amused, who is to say that the price was too much? How, indeed, is "value" determined?

Quote

"Filing a complaint" does not mean you arrest someone, and it does not mean you refer a case to the DA. If you try to arrest someone you will be charged with kidnapping or impersonating an officer. If you steal police paperwork or infiltrate a computer network to refer a case to the DA, you will end up in a heap of trouble. The police and the DA will not slap you on the wrist for "picayune parsing of definitions."

Jed, get real for a change. Who (certainly not me) suggested someone just visit Rossi and arrest him? Where in the world did you find such an improbable suggestion? The cite I gave you was quite clear. If you suspect fraud was committed, and it's a local and not a federal issue, you can contact your local district or state attorney. That, of course, is what I suggested which for reasons known only to you, you took exception with.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

How do you then explain Dewey's actions? Admittedly, he seemed to do more damage to public relations than good, but he clearly was trying. And we all know APCO has been involved at some level. So I think you might be blowing a little smoke here.

1. Dewey developed a personal reaction to Rossi's phantasmagoria, as well as to Planet Rossi. As do many of us, he simply wrote what he knew. This was not an "IH public relations game" and he was not speaking for IH, I'm sure. IH apparently tolerated it, or they didn't. One might notice that he more or less stopped. But he pops in when there is some particularly outrageous nonsense, like "Blackwater Security." Dewey is an investor in IH, not an employee. He would be under NDA, I'm pretty sure, but if he violates it in some minor way, they aren't likely to sue him. They are all friends, long-term. One might notice that there were many things he refused to talk about.

2. We do not know that APCO is involved. That is a classic Planet Rossi meme, based originally on one piece of evidence, that the email sent to Mats Lewan, Steve Krivit, and some others in early March was cc'd to an email address at APCO. Later, when the Answer was filed, there is a reference in an email to a visit to the Doral plant, about a year earlier, from that same person.

This does not mean that APCO is involved, but that someone at APCO is interested in LENR. The interest may be entirely personal at this time. It is possible that if IH decides to ask for governmental funding (which is not uncommon for their limited partnerships), that then this person will assist them, personally, or APCO will get involved as a company.

But IH gains nothing from the blog discussions of Rossi being a possible fraud. Their concern is entirely, I'm sure, with the court process. It's not impossible that their friend at APCO is looking at things, because of long-term interests. That is why I confined my analysis to the past and to now. There might be something in the future, and they might, indeed, be concerned that the Rossi affair could damage "LENR public relations."

What is highly unlikely is that anyone, anywhere, is being paid to damage Rossi's reputation through blog and forum discussions. It makes no economic sense. IH is acting through their attorneys in Rossi v. Darden.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

That would be a travesty, really.

Travesty: a false, absurd, or distorted representation of something."the absurdly lenient sentence is a travesty of justice"

What would be travestied? If Rossi and IH agree on a settlement, and it isn't a settlement unless they agree, who would we be to claim it is false or distorts something?

What do people want? Blood on the floor?

If Rossi has real devices, he will reveal them soon enough. And if not, what is gained by an expensive court process that might only create more controversy? More specifically, who is supposed to pay for that?

Does Rossi have a contract with Planet Rossi, some obligation to them? (No.)