Industrial Heat's James A. Bass: President of Reactance Engineering Inc and Engineer for JM Products

  • Quote

    LENR+ does not exist. It is a figment of Gluck's imagination. Ni-H cold fusion is no stronger or more reproducible Pd-D. It may not even exist.


    A win by Rossi would wipe out the last source of funding and destroy what little is left of LENR. It would be a victory for criminal fraud.


    I view the situation very differently, because I'm convinced that the "Rossi Effect" (cold fusion with a power density of over 1000watts per gram) is indeed real. And I'm not convinced (yet) there was flat out fraud involved in the year long test.


    If Rossi were to win the case -- which I think will require him to prove that there was a customer and a real manufacturing process -- then he'd be able to continue with his development of the E-Cat, High Temp E-Cat, and Quark X. The funding of LENR would not come to an end and testing of his methods and others would continue around the world. If IH were to go bankrupt, it wouldn't be death of LENR like you proclaim it to be. Cold fusion research is cheap and has been conducted on shoe string budgets in the past. If someone wants to perform LENR research, they'll be able to do so in most cases. And, in my opinion, after Rossi provided more evidence of his effect, a tidal wave of funding could arrive from a multitude of sources.


    If Rossi were to lose the case so severely his work came to an end, then his technology would survive as people continued to attempt replication. Once a working recipe was figured out by someone like Alan Smith, replications could take place around the world and funding would increase.

  • A win for Rossi would be a win for LENR+.



    IHFB,


    If he wins $89 million on a technicality, or the whims of a jury, without the 1MW being proven credible...is that still a win for LENR+? Although unlikely, it is possible.


    And yes, of course we all wish the Ecat worked like a charm, that it vented the million watts thermal it produced at a COP 50, by some exotic, previously undiscovered radiation through the small toilet vent/chimney, through the rafters, out a bay door, or even by an 100% endothermic manufacturing process as Rossi claimed. If so, trust me I will be the first to travel to Miami and ask Rossi for forgiveness, along with being a very happy man.

  • It is not yet decided by the court that anything criminal has happened. That is their job.


    Actually, it would be the job of the police, and later the jury, not the court itself. However, in my opinion, he has engaged in criminal fraud. Inept, unconvincing, yet still criminal.


    The present lawsuit is civil, not criminal, and it is against I.H., not Rossi. (The counter-suits are against Rossi and his gang of criminal co-conspirator nincompoops. Again, that is my opinion of them.)

  • I thought the option of jury was for the defense not the prosecution. But with all these counter suits, who knows..


    I believe you are thinking about criminal cases. The plaintiff in a civil case is not the "prosecution," except in some technical sense. The standard of proof is quite different; in criminal cases to obtain a "guilty" verdict, proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required, and generally it must be unanimous (I think there are some exceptions). In a civil trial, the standard is "preponderance of the evidence," and the reason is obvious: the court does not favor one side over the other, whereas in criminal trials, U.S. courts are designed to avoid convicting those who might possibly be innocent, even if the possibility is small.


    If I sue my ex-wife for child support, say, the courts will decide what is the most fair, balanced, equitable decision. If there is a dispute over who owns something, there is no preference for the defendant over the plaintiff. Decisions need not be certain. Preponderance of the evidence. It could be a coin toss. But usually juries are smarter than that.....

  • It is interesting that he has a BS degree (74) from Rutgers in----- Spanish


    Your reading iappears mistaken. The reading should be clear: James Bass' degree is Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering "BSEE" from Rutgers--- summa cum laude (highest honors). It appears he may have earned another bachelor's with IT specializations, that appear under the rubric of "Spanish Software".


    Education
    Bachelor Degree '74 Rutgers University Jan '74 BSEE Rutgers University, 1974 Summa Cum Laude Deans List, Presidents List, Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Beta Pi. Bachelor Degree | Spanish Software: numerous assemblers, Visual Basic, C, C#, Windows Server, MS SQL, MySQL, Oracle, Linux, Unix, Alcatel Motive CPE Network Manager, National Instruments LabView. Speak fluent Spanish and conversant in French and Portuguese

  • A win by Rossi would wipe out the last source of funding and destroy what little is left of LENR. It would be a victory for criminal fraud.


    No. First of all, even if Rossi were to win a verdict for $89 million, a finding of fraud here against IH is so unlikely that it's not worth considering. I have previously given legal reasons for this. IH has, also, but the Judge left this standing because maybe Rossi can pull a rabbit out of a hat. As discovery proceeds, this may shift. and the whole case could be subject to dismissal from a number of obvious possible reasons.


    If Rossi somehow got a verdict for the GPT payment, but if the attempt to pierce the corporate veil fails, as seems highly likely (the Rossi position essentially attacks the basis and safety of investment through corporations and LLCs, basic to the U.S. economy in many ways), then IH simply goes bankrupt, that's all. IHHI, which is where the money is, is untouched. No big deal. And the Texas Tech collaboration will be untouched.


    Rossi is attempting to find out if IH could directly pay the $89 million, or how they planned to pay it. The answer is obvious: if Rossi delivered working technology, they could then raise that money, they are expert at it. The idea that IH was really Cherokee, with $89 million in the bank, say, was a Rossi fantasy from day one. Rossi obviously thinks that if they didn't have the money, then, of course, they were lying snakes. He apparently has no idea of how venture capitalists work. He found what may have been the most generous possible, and then is attempting to screw them over.


    Why? I do not find it clear. Paranoid, probably, and the paranoid then consider whatever they do as justified in the name of protecting themselves.

  • It is not yet decided by the court that anything criminal has happened. That is their job. And you never know, Rossi has so many hats that at least two may contain rabbits.


    Wabbits.


    As has been pointed out, this is a civil trial and will not decide if anything criminal has happened. Jed was giving his opinion, to which he has a right. I do think that some of what Rossi did might be criminal, but proving criminal fraud is much more difficult than showing civil fraud, where the standard is merely the preponderance of the evidence.


    There is an idea that if we create a huge number of reasons for something, it is somehow stronger than one reason, even if the huge number are all weak.


    I think there is a name for this fallacy, but it does not come to mind, except for "dumb."

  • Abd,


    I may have missed it, but is IHHI involved/collaborating with Duncan's "Seashore Research LLC", or his Texas Tech University LENR facility? I knew about Gates. Thx.


    IH has their finger on the pulse of LENR research, AFAIK.


    However, no, I have no information indicating specific "collaboration." When I wrote that a Rossi win in Rossi v. Darden would not affect Texas Tech, that was because, as far as I know, there is no IH funding there. What Gates generously provided was quite enough for what they have set out to do.


    It could have a future effect, except that the "IH" funding for future LENR research is protected by not having been invested in IH. The whole system is set up to protect investment and investors from accidents or mistakes that can take down an individual LLC. It looks right now that IH is an operating company, probably running a lab or research office in North Carolina, but with only operating assets. I.e., temporary, short-term, enough to cover operating expenses based on agreements with the source of funding, which would be IHHI.


    LENR product development I expect to be extraordinarily expensive, it could possible require a billion dollars per year to make major progress. My view is that the field is not ready for that; too little is known about the basic effects, so throwing money at it would likely waste much or most of the funding. What is needed at this point is fundamental research, and as such projects are identified -- The Texas Tech/ENEA collaboration is one such -- they should be adequately funded. Funding will thus gradually expand and will pave the way, we suspect, for the development of commercial projects.


    Rossi was far ahead of the envelope, outside of anything anyone else had seen. But his claims were not considered impossible by those who know LENR. That is part of how he got away with what he appears to have done for so long. He'd still be getting away with it if he had not filed the lawsuit, though whether that would have lasted, I certainly don't know.


    When I proposed improving funding for pure research, I considered it Plan B. Plan A was that commercial devices appear on the market. My position was that commercial efforts can fail for any of many reasons, and LENR was far too important as a possibility for the future to place reliance on one person or one effort, especially if it appeared that nothing was truly verifiable.


    Hence Plan B, which essentially might ignore Rossi. I did not take that position because I believed he was a fraud, rather as simple prudence, creating a backup. What I could see of Rossi created an impression of fraud, though, I simply knew that there were other possibilities.

  • Quote

    My view is that the field is not ready for that; too little is known about the basic effects, so throwing money at it would likely waste much or most of the funding. What is needed at this point is fundamental research


    Skeptics would agree, and add that without progress on fundamental theory the fact that nuclear level phenomena never seem to give large reproducible excess heat is a strong negative.


    Quote

    Rossi was far ahead of the envelope, outside of anything anyone else had seen. But his claims were not considered impossible by those who know LENR.


    I think that contradicts the above point. If controllable large useful excess heat is possible, as Rossi claims, then it is very important both for fundamental research (which it would immediately allow) and industry. And if it is not impossible for Rossi to reach this desired goal, surely it is possible for a creative well-funded research lab to do the same.

  • Skeptics would agree, and add that without progress on fundamental theory the fact that nuclear level phenomena never seem to give large reproducible excess heat is a strong negative.


    Actually, that is a weak negative. It is entirely possible to clearly identify and understand phenomena that are not yet controllable.


    That, in fact, is the role of heat/helium work. Even if the effect is not controlled, but can be triggered at least occasionally, determining correlation is not difficult (the existing difficulties have to do with capturing and measuring helium, but these have been adequately overcome), and if all the helium can be captured, determining a ratio is also not difficult. For a single experiment, a single pair of measurements, this is not terribly significant, the result could be a coincidence, and this is the meaning of the objections that have been made that neglected correlation across many experiments and conditions. I.e., garbage in, garbage out, it's been said.


    However, when effects that would be expected to be independent turn out to be correlated, some common cause is to be expected.


    There are two experiments (out of very many that show the correlation) where anodic reversal was used, and both experiments found a heat/helium ratio within experimental error of the deuterium -> helium theoretical fusion value if there are no leakages of helium or energy.


    That led me to conclude that anodic reversal was stripping the outer layer of palladium, releasing all the helium, which is consistent with the known behavior of helium in palladium.


    (the correlation exists without this additional feature, but the helium found is roughly 60% of that theoretical value).


    The causes of unreliable heat are reasonably well known, but, yes, this is a weakness. For heat/helium measurements, though, this actually is a strength, because the "dead cells" -- otherwise identical -- become controls. This appears to be universal: no heat, no helium. Heat, *almost always* commensurate helium. There are a few outliers, with possible explanations as well.


    This is a reasonably solid picture, and if this had been known in 1989, history would likely have been quite different. Helium was reported, but without correlation study, and it seemed so unlikely..... Pons and Fleischmann believed that the effect was a bulk effect, apparently, and so helium would have been expected in the bulk, but it appears that their cathodes were analyzed for helium and little or none was found. So helium freaked them out and they decided to ignore it. In fact, now, we can look back and see that the outer layers of those cathodes were stripped before they were analyzed, to avoid the possibility of atmospheric contamination, though that does not seem to happen. That, from what we know now, would remove the helium.

  • Rossi was far ahead of the envelope, outside of anything anyone else had seen. But his claims were not considered impossible by those who know LENR.


    I think that contradicts the above point. If controllable large useful excess heat is possible, as Rossi claims, then it is very important both for fundamental research (which it would immediately allow) and industry. And if it is not impossible for Rossi to reach this desired goal, surely it is possible for a creative well-funded research lab to do the same.


    This is a cart-before-the-horse argument. First of all, NiH effects were not considered impossible. Low-level effects have been rather widely reported, but nothing reliably confirmed. Sure, major heat would be very important, that's obvious. When I wrote that his "claims were not considered impossible," this simply meant that the claims could not be ruled out, even if they were far ahead of the state-of-the-art.


    "Reach the goal" is being confused here with "possibility." If I say that it was possible that someone like Rossi could find something overlooked by others, that is simply negating the impossibility argument. (Which is common. Often it is assumed that the Rossi effect is transmutation involving copper, because Rossi hinted at that or there was a bad analysis or something. And then the high energy required for the "claimed hydrogen fusion" is cited as a reason to disregard Rossi's claim.)


    I will still say this: it is not impossible that someone will find a way to generate NiH reactions with high heat. I just don't expect it to happen soon, but we could always get lucky.


    Yes, it is possible that a "creative well-funded research lab" might confirm a claim. But it is not necessarily a slam-dunk, especially if Rossi litters the road with red herrings, as he appears to have done deliberately on occasion. My own suggestion, given what we know, is to ignore Rossi and not use any of his work as a benchmark. Considering any NiH results as "confirmation" of Rossi is generally an error.


    Rossi is promoting this idea, going after Brillouin as if they stole his IP, with IH help. And Brillouin is being thought of as some kind of confirmation of Rossi, by some.

  • Quote

    If he wins $89 million on a technicality, or the whims of a jury, without the 1MW being proven credible...is that still a win for LENR+? Although unlikely, it is possible.


    Technically possible but realistically, extremely unlikely. And if Rossi won, you can be sure that IH and Jones Day would find grounds for an appeal.

  • you can be sure that IH and Jones Day would find grounds for an appeal.


    But, keep in mind that successful appeals are generally based solely on judicial errors... with the very rare exception of some few that gain certiori with the U.S. Supreme Court. Grounds for "cert", include conflicting lower appelate decisions and/or other issues arising the "Supremes" consider to be of Constitutional magnitude.


    (Longview: Not an attorney, nor lawyer, nor barrister, nor advocate, nor solicitor, nor counselor, nor agent).

  • I don't consider the Brillouin technology to be any more of a confirmation of Rossi's technology than Focardi/Piantelli's experiments. It is additional proof that NiH is possible, but in no represents the Rossi Effect because of the low power that has been measured. Brillouin alleges that they have achieved significantly higher power levels, but they have not allowed third parties to test such systems. The recent presentation about the test of a Brillouin "hot tube" reactor was performed WITHOUT their critical "Q-Pulse" being active. In their system, the "Q-Pulse" is what turns the reaction on and off. Without it, very little excess heat is produced.


    I think what Rossi is worried about is that in unpublished experimentation and tests, IH could have potentially utilized E-Cat IP transferred to them by IH. Whether or not IH would allow such a transfer is unknown. However, according to IH's own court documents, they have an exclusive right to share Rossi's IP with anyone they want to without even making them sign a non-disclosure agreement. This makes it seem plausible to me that they could have shared the information either formally -- or through oral conversation like how Rossi shared information with Darden -- about Rossi's IP. But there is no way of knowing.


    I'd personally like to see Brillouin incorporate some lithium "fuel" into their reactor. It could be a way of boosting their power output. Whether or not they could ever commercialize such a system with added lithium due to the Fluid Heater patent is beyond my knowledge.

  • Self S. -
    What do you consider the Ecat IP? clearly it is not Ni and H since that has been around since Thermocore and CETI. Clearly it is not hot Ni and gas since that also has be in the LENR play book for some time. Clearly it is not the use of Li since that also has been around since 89.


    I too cannot see that Brillouin is using "Rossi's technology".

  • This is how I understand the evolution of Rossi's technology.


    Era 1 (2008-2009) - Andrea Rossi built his earliest systems utilizing a mixture of nickel, copper, and palladium powders. Most probably, he performed testing with other "reverse hydrogen spillover" catalysts as well. The nickel powder was nothing fancy, but he augmented the excess heat production by rapidly varying the elevated hydrogen pressure inside of the reactor to stimulate reactions. In addition to this, he vacuumed his nickel in-situ.


    Era 2 (Early Era After Opening JONP) - Andrea Rossi performed his first public tests and allowed Dr. Levi to perform a test in which a system, for all practical purposes, self sustained for eighteen hours. The fuel probably no longer contained palladium. However, it likely contained the additives copper and lithium. I've heard that the lithium used in this time period was nano-shell passivated lithium powder. If copper powder was not used, the internal copper reactor core could have possibly provided the same function as a spillover catalyst. The copper would have also maximized the heating rate (thermal shock) provided by the resistors due to the high thermal conductivity of copper. Please note that in this era he still used a hydrogen tank and probably utilized the same stimulation methods of altering pressure. The use of a hydrogen tank was important because the elemental lithium would compete with nickel for the hydrogen. If a hydrogen tank was not used, the lithium would use up hydrogen that would otherwise be absorbed by the nickel. He also began working on improving electromagnetic stimulation.


    Era 3 (Hydride Era) - Andrea Rossi eliminated the hydrogen tank and started using LiAlH4, first as a pellet and then in powder formed mixed in with the nickel and elemental lithium. I suspect but I'm not certain the elemental lithium was sometimes in the form of lithium hydride. If elemental lithium was used, the lithium would have competed for hydrogen with the nickel. This would have reduced the hydrogen available to the nickel. The use of LiH would also provide a secondary bump of hydrogen pressure, possibly important for maximum absorption of hydrogen by nickel, at around 700C.


    Era 4 (Abandoned Gas Cat) - Andrea Rossi started researching how to heat a reactor with natural gas. To stimulate such a reactor, he filed a patent application for providing a voltage across the fuel. However, this line of research was abandoned by the increasing COPs of ordinary E-Cats powered by electricity. His understanding of EM stimulation increased dramatically during this time.


    Era 5 (Quark Era) - A sapphire tube is placed in a circuit that provides power for heating and EM stimulation. The result is more electrical power comes out of the circuit than is put in as well as a massive production of heat. Wire -- Reactor Tube -- Wire. Not much else is known. Glow discharge may be involved.


    To answer your question, I don't consider his technology in Era 1 to be the "Rossi Effect." I consider that to be the Focardi-Rossi Effect. When I speak of the Rossi Effect, I'm only addressing Era 2 and 3. My primary interest is seeing replication of Era 2 and 3 systems.

  • Mary Yugo wrote:


    But, keep in mind that successful appeals are generally based solely on judicial errors. [...]


    At some point there will be enough evidence to move for dismissal of claims against Cherokee and against Darden and Vaughn personally, and the judge will decide. Based on what I know and assuming it is correct, if the judge does not dismiss those counts, probably leaving only the breach of contract claim, they would have an appealable issue and I'd expect them to win on it.


    If this analysis is correct, Rossi winning would give him a mouthful of hair, because there would not be enough left in IH to pay his legal costs. Did anyone tell Rossi all this before he filed? If they did, would he have listened? He could win the License back, because that would be attachable property, for sure, and probably the only significant property of IH by that time. If it can be called "significant."

  • If this analysis is correct, Rossi winning would give him a mouthful of hair, because there would not be enough left in IH to pay his legal costs. Did anyone tell Rossi all this before he filed? If they did, would he have listened? He could win the License back, because that would be attachable property, for sure, and probably the only significant property of IH by that time. If it can be called "significant."


    Abd : Finally you commit the fraudster games..! I said this already months ago!, based on company structure etc..


    I guess we all enjoy the soap, just we prefer different parfumes...

  • I still wish that James A. Bass would produce a statement for the court that would be published for all to see. His testimony is critical to understanding what exactly went on during the one year test of the plant. Although I think the truth of what happened in Doral will have no impact on the reality of the E-Cat (which in my opinion has been firmly established although I accept others feel differently), it will have a huge impact on how Andrea Rossi progresses in his effort to commercialize the technology. My hunch is that James A. Bass is the one person whose testimony is likely to be the least biased of any individual on any side of this legal battle. He's a credible engineer that has been doing very real technical work, sometimes in leadership positions, for decades. There's no obvious reason for him to have a hidden agenda, unlike Rossi OR Darden. Even if there was excess heat produced (the full one megawatt at times or a far lower output), if there was no real manufacturing process taking place that produced an actual product, Andrea Rossi would be forever discredited as a totally scrupulous conman. But if a real manufacturing process was taking place utilizing an endothermic process as Rossi claims -- reducing the need for ventilating out waste heat -- then such a revelation would accelerate Andrea Rossi forward. Even if he'd been less than honest or completely transparent (or even outright sneaky and mischevious at times) the central tenant of what the test was all about would be upheld.


    To be blunter than the head of a sledgehammer, I pray that we learn the truth SOON. Whatever the truth here may be, our community deserves to know. The whole battle between IH and Rossi is like a huge, hideous grape fruit sized tumor on the face of the LENR community that's starting to crack the skin and ooze out. If either side has slam dunk evidence against the other, they would do a great service for ALL OF US if they'd release it openly.


    The basic practical method of inducing LENR are now understood. Although a great deal of additional testing need to be performed to gain the experience to enhance hydrogen absorption, form the high pressure bubbles inside of nickel, and trigger excess heat, we can move forward with or without Andrea Rossi. Since he is ahead of all of us -- except maybe Me356 -- my hope is that he'll prove the year long test was indeed successful, producing excess heat used in the manufacturing or synthesis of a chemical product. That way a very advanced varient of the E-Cat technology, the Quark, can be brought to the market much sooner. Also, despite any debates about his level of straight forwardness, I think Andrea Rossi's ingenuity and inventiveness and obsessive work ethic should be recognized as rare and unique.

  • If either side has slam dunk evidence against the other, they would do a great service for ALL OF US if they'd release it openly.


    Slam dunk evidence is right there in Exhibit 5! Also in Penon's initial plan, which describes a farce, not a test. There is no way to measure steam quality, or even confirm that there is steam. Plus we have the photos of the lab ceiling.


    The only way you can deny that these things are slam dunk proof is to assert that they are lies. You have to say that Exhibit 5 does not show Rossi's data, the photos are fake, and so on. If you accept these things are real, then you must accept that Rossi's claims are wrong.

  • . He's a credible engineer that has been doing very real technical work, sometimes in leadership positions, for decades. There's no obvious reason for him to have a hidden agenda, unlike Rossi OR Darden.



    MrSS,


    Yes, Jim Bass is no doubt a talented guy. Doubtful he could be fooled by Rossi into believing the supposed JMP process was real, if in fact it was not. So I tend to think that whatever Rossi was doing...legit, or not, he knew either way.


    I do however mildly disagree with your comment that he had no reason/motive to knowingly go along with a scam. As you show in the beginning of this thread, he applied for unemployment payments in 2014, and is divorced...as he talks in the article about his ex. Not a good sign for someone his age (64 I think), after such a good career, needing unemployment. Someone else pointed out also he has a nice house...blah blah blah.


    Not saying this predisposes him to turning a blind eye for a nice payday, but that you can not rule it out. Then there was that cheap looking "JMP" business card. Oh my, how could anyone with any professional pride show that thing with a straight face? ;)


    Other than that...nice post. I was going to give you a like until that last part about Rossi. :) That has yet to be determined.

  • Hello Shane,


    In this day and age, people change jobs like shoes. My mother has told me that back in her day, people kept jobs for years and were scared of quitting for fear of having it seem like a bad mark on their resume. Now, people hop from job to job without worrying much. I don't see how him being unemployed makes him more or less likely to willingly participate in a fraudulent scheme. Quitting a job is one thing, but being involved in a con job is totally different. If this was a con job (which I do NOT think it was but we need to wait for more evidence) my guess is he would have quit. Because you can't really get a job very easily from jail.

  • MrSS,


    We shall see. Scam or legit, if he has some honor -as all us professionals do, we will know soon. In his shoes I would be throwing Rossi under the bus about NOW if suckered, or making some public statement in defense if not.

  • In this day and age, people change jobs like shoes. My mother has told me that back in her day, people kept jobs for years and were scared of quitting for fear of having it seem like a bad mark on their resume. Now, people hop from job to job without worrying much. I don't see how him being unemployed makes him more or less likely to willingly participate in a fraudulent scheme. Quitting a job is one thing, but being involved in a con job is totally different. If this was a con job (which I do NOT think it was but we need to wait for more evidence) my guess is he would have quit. Because you can't really get a job very easily from jail.


    I will agree with SS here. In order to collect unemployment insurance, one must have had a job, because that insurance payment will be based on the employment income. Self-employed contractors do not get unemployment insurance. However, at one point I had a job and then was an independent contractor. I collected unemployment insurance during the times when I had no contract. That, by the way, extended the benefits, which are for so many weeks, and every week I worked and did not collect then added to the weeks of my award.


    If one has earned unemployment insurance, it is essentially free money. It's silly to not collect it. It does not mean that he was "desperate," because unemployment insurance is not based on wealth, nor does non-employment income have any impact on it. The issue is only whether or not one is available to work, that is a requirement. In theory, I might have been able to do contract work and still collect, based on the idea that I could do my contract work in addition to the regular employment, but I never did that and I don't recall the very specific rules. It was fine to just have some extra income for weeks when I had no contract income. As an independent designer, which I was for most of my career, work was always irregular, feast and famine, work your butt off -- it was always rush -- then no work and selling. Then I figured out how to move beyond that. Hire a designer!

  • MrSS,


    We shall see. Scam or legit, if he has some honor -as all us professionals do, we will know soon. In his shoes I would be throwing Rossi under the bus about NOW if suckered, or making some public statement in defense if not.


    No throwing anyone under a bus. At this point, probably no public statement, he would gain almost nothing from that. Rather, this is very simple: he has almost certainly been served with interrogatories. He will also Answer the complaint. In the Answer we may learn something. With the interrogatories, we won't. If he answers truthfully and if he did not knowingly participate in fraudulent representation (where he would know that there was a deceptive intention that could cause harm), I would expect that (1) his responses may be used against Rossi, and (2) IH may decide to drop the claim against. This is even without a settlement. One very iffy situation is that he shares an attorney with Johnson, whereas his interests may be quite distinct from those of Johnson. If I were IH, I would be looking at what I could properly do to support Bass in encouraging him to be fully truthful.


    This analysis, of course, assumes that the customer was fraudulent, as appears at this point, the Rossi Answer not having been filed yet. Maybe there are wabbits there.

  • This is not a debate on the merits, or not, of unemployment payments. If you need it, well you need it. All I said was that this Mr. Bass needed public assistance in his retirement years, after what appears to be a stellar career. I have never known an engineer with his resume, having to do that.


    Most, like Abd, having been in that situation are not susceptible to coercion, but are all? We shall see. Rossi was described in an Italian newspaper in the height of the PetrolDragon affair as having a talent for persuading scientists (smart people), so one never knows. Those mortgage payments, alimony, child support, Golfclub dues, BMW lease, etc. they all have a way to undermine ones will.


    Like I said, we shall see.