Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • Siffer - Rossi's multi-decade trail of deception, destruction and theft has come home to roost and everyone whom he previously has associated with eventually got used up and tossed by the wayside. The trail of heartbreak and ruination left by this guy over the decades is staggering. Magnus was not to be one of those exceptions and I feel badly for him. Rossi thought he could trick or inculcate us fully into his skulduggery but he bet incorrectly. The Uppsala crew will also soon learn the price of choosing to stay by Rossi's side and assisting, whether intentionally or not, with his deception.


    If you are making threats Dewey, please be more specific... Is it only me who visualize the bible ramblings of Pulp Fiction when you are trying to say something?

  • Well. Uppsala, Gullström are some hints on what is going on, but you already know that ...

    Thank you for the response.


    I have read about Mr. Gullstrom's theory paper with Rossi. But am unclear about Uppsala's role with Gullstrom, Rossi or how Hydrofusion is involved with them. I know that sometimes a person can conduct private "business" without the employer sponsorship. Can you state if Gullstrom and Uppsala did the report as an official collaboration or was Gullstrom on his own?


    I was originally asking about Hydrofusion, but your answer indicated that there was some connection with the other two? Can you clarify?

    Thanks.

  • At least the "cannot be sure" is a fact. The rest is repeat FUD.


    sifferkoll, I'm fairly new here to this forum, but have observed from previous posts here that you have some relationship with Hydro Fusion. I am quite curious regarding your thoughts about Andrea Rossi's email to Tom Darden (which I've included below for reference). What are your thoughts regarding Rossi's intentional deception of Hydro Fusion?


    Thanks in advance,


    sigmoidal


    Dear Tom,

    mission accomplished.
    With this company Hydrofusion we had agreed upon a draft to sell them IP, know
    how and manufacturing license for Europe but Germany, France and Italy. By our
    law, if you send a proposal you are engaged to accept if the proposee accepts
    all the conditions of the proposal. After receiving your last text at the end
    of August I decided to go ahead with you, therefore I had to get rid of this
    engagement. The only way out was to invite them to a test, ask them to bring
    with them their consultant. I made the test abort, maintaining the temperatures
    below the starting limit. Then I made up some discussions, I said they made a
    wrong test, they escaped, I am free.
    We did not have damages of image, because, knowing what was on the road, I
    had made before their test a disclaimer, saying that the Hot temperature E-Cat
    was just a prototype, still under test and validation and subject to
    modification, thing that I am repeating everywhere. Now I am publishing that I
    am surprised of all this ado for nothing, since I already said that for the Hot
    Cat we needed more tests before saying it is a product ready for the market.
    At this point we can organize with Cherokee a world strategy, since all the
    other licensees are just commercial: for example in Africa we will have just to
    pay a roialty to the local agent upon our sale price , but they all are very
    good and they can sell either energy or plants. Nobody has rights upon the IP,
    know how, manufacturing and so on.
    Warmest Regards,

    Andrea


  • Nope. No details. Use your imagination. It is a small world you know.


  • Old news. This has been covered long ago and sorted out in person. Don't worry about it.

  • Siffer - Rossi's multi-decade trail of deception, destruction and theft has come home to roost and everyone whom he previously has associated with eventually got used up and tossed by the wayside. The trail of heartbreak and ruination left by this guy over the decades is staggering. Magnus was not to be one of those exceptions and I feel badly for him. Rossi thought he could trick or inculcate us fully into his skulduggery but he bet incorrectly. The Uppsala crew will also soon learn the price of choosing to stay by Rossi's side and assisting, whether intentionally or not, with his deception.


    All divorces in Sweden goes through the court the good one as well (yes there are good divorces which are quite common in Sweden from what I experienced). Probably when you paint a picture from the US you probably are way way wrong in your judgement as you paint it here. So stop that because you make the IH side quite incompetent and evil. Also you paint it like Uppsala is going to suffer. Well I agree that people have been lacking judgement, but you make it like the whole university will go down, Is that really realistic? We are talking about a small unit of the physics department that will get some bad rep, but will survive and in a couple of years everything will be forgotten. Media is way way uninterested and unless IH would want to spend all their lovely money in discreditating Uppsala, students will still go to the university en masse. People are uninterested in cold fusion, they are more worried about what happend in Sweden last night, ( lol that Trump figure have everything ass backward US has way more problems today with unlawfulness than what we have, but yes the trend is so that we must focus on to turn the tide and there are a lot of effort by good people that engage in other people trying just that).

  • Old news. This has been covered long ago and sorted out in person. Don't worry about it.


    Yes, I have no worries about it at all. I was asking what you thought about Rossi's intentional deception? Or perhaps you do not perceive it as deception? I figure you have a unique perspective on how this email reflects on Rossi's crediblity. Maybe I should be more specific. From your perspective, how does this email reflect on Rossi's credibility?

  • Yes, I have no worries about it at all. I was asking what you thought about Rossi's intentional deception? Or perhaps you do not perceive it as deception? I figure you have a unique perspective on how this email reflects on Rossi's crediblity. Maybe I should be more specific. From your perspective, how does this email reflect on Rossi's credibility?


    As I said, there are more to it than the email says and it has been sorted out long ago in person. So it does not reflect on Rossi credibility at all. Knowing the full circumstances the events and behavior are logical.

  • As I said, there are more to it than the email says and it has been sorted out long ago in person. So it does not reflect on Rossi credibility at all. Knowing the full circumstances the events and behavior are logical.


    Well, forgive me, but I don't understand how 'it does not reflect on Rossi credibility at all'. Could you point me to some information where you explained this, or if it is not publicly posted, could you provide more details about why you have come to this conclusion?


    Perhaps you can understand why others besides myself are puzzled by this seeming contradiction?

  • Well, forgive me, but I don't understand how 'it does not reflect on Rossi credibility at all'. Could you point me to some information where you explained this, or if it is not publicly posted, could you provide more details about why you have come to this conclusion?


    Perhaps you can understand why others besides myself are puzzled by this seeming contradiction?


    I believe I'm pretty specific when I say that this has been sorted out and that I can not go into details on it. As far as I can see the only reason for IH to bring that mail into the lawsuit was to damage the relationship between Ross and HF. And it failed. What is interesting though is the fact that they bothered to include it, because there are no other reasons than to cause damage. (and why would it be in the interest for IH do that? ... )

  • I believe I'm pretty specific when I say that this has been sorted out and that I can not go into details on it. As far as I can see the only reason for IH to bring that mail into the lawsuit was to damage the relationship between Ross and HF. And it failed. What is interesting though is the fact that they bothered to include it, because there are no other reasons than to cause damage. (and why would it be in the interest for IH do that? ... )


    Hi Sifferkoll,


    Scorched earth tactics, that is. Making sure potential backers are scared-off. I think IH will be involved for the longer term, and they want to make sure that AR no longer poses any threat to them.


    Cheers,


    JB

  • I don't understand- Rossi is afraid of Murry so he brakes the contract and throws him out,

    Afraid of law suits so the emails get destroyed in violation of the contract and you flee the country.

    Afraid of an Israeli business man who asks if Levi wants a job, and it is called a threat and witness tampering.


    Sounds like they are all running scared.

  • Note: The following is primarily about the LEGAL aspects of Rossi vs. Darden. However it does also speak to the ROSSI EFFECT and PSYCHOSOCIAL issues, as I discuss at the conclusion of the post.


    The excerpt from Darden's deposition on 2017-02-16 is very interesting reading. I've broken this into two parts.


    Context: Rossi's lawyers are asking about the 2nd Amendment regarding the GPT for the 6 cylinder unit. We now know that Ampenergo refused to sign, which was a requirement of any GPT amendment. In this portion of the deposition, Rossi's lawyers question Darden about this.


    From Document 226-3 pages 4-7


    Q.· ·And did they [Ampenergo] ever explain to you why they didn't want to sign this?


    A.· ·No, we were -- we were confused about that.


    Q.· ·Is there any reason that you're aware of today as to why they would not want to sign?


    A.· ·I don't remember the conversations around I think J.T. might have been the one talking to them.


    Q.· ·Did you have discussions with Dr. Rossi about Ampenergo's refusal to sign it?


    A.· ·Yes, we did.


    Q.· ·And what were those conversations?


    A.· ·Well, they said, "Well, they didn't sign. So, you know, I guess that deal is off or can't do that."


    Q.· ·So after that conversation took place did you say, "Hey, listen, Ampenergo didn't sign.· The license agreement says you guys start the test as soon as you get -- as soon as the equipment arrives; therefore, you're in breach"?


    A.· ·Yes.· We said, "We don't owe you [Rossi] -- you know, sorry.· You missed the date.·They don't agree to this so what are we going to do."· We said to him, "We would love to pay you some more money if we had technology that worked.· So why don't you think of some other kind of test that we could do.· We're willing to pay you money if you -- if we can build devices and we can operate those devises. We don't care how long it is really."· I mean, we care a little bit but, you know, we're willing to be very malleable about that. "Let's build some devices.· Let's get something operating." You know, but, I mean, the agreement speaks for itself.


    Q. Did you put that -- that subsequent offer in writing?


    A. I don't know.· I mean, it was -- did we say to him in writing somewhere, "We can't build these units.· We want to build these units.· Help us build these units. Let's get something going."· I don't know. But we -- I'm sure that we said to him, "Andrea, the problem is not money.· We're happy to pay money if we have technology that works. We don't have technology that works. Help us get some technology working somewhere and we're happy to pay you some money."



    Q. Right. But did you ever say in writing, "Hey, listen, the time for the test has now come and gone.· We need to reach some other arrangement.· We're happy to pay you money, but it's got to be under different terms"?

    MR. BELL:· Objection to form.


    THE WITNESS:· I don't remember specific writing about that.· You know, we were in the same office so we talked about a lot of this.



    Q. (BY MR. CHAIKEN) Did you -- after you had the conversation with Dr. Rossi about Ampenergo not signing off did you say, "Hey, you know what, Ampenergo didn't sign off. Let's start the guaranteed performance test right away because the clock is ticking and we made this investment, and time is money"?

    MR. BELL: Objection to form.


    THE WITNESS:· Well, we said all the time, "We want to get something running."· I'm sure that we didn't say, "Let's start the guaranteed performance test."· You know, the time period for that had passed.


    Q. Got it. So it's your testimony today that Dr. Rossi knew all along right after October 2013 that his ability to enforce the 89 million dollar payment pursuant to the license agreement had come and gone?


    A. Yes. He knew that his ability to enforce that had come and gone. We also told him that if we had successful evidence after the technology worked, that we approved devices that we built, we would be happy to discuss paying you [Rossi] more money.

    [emphasis sigmoidal]


    Analysis: Darden, under sworn deposition, is testifying that he told Rossi early (before Doral) that the GPT was 'off' and that "we dont owe you - sorry, you missed the date". Also, Darden is saying under oath that 'We would love to pay you money for something that worked...We don't have technology that works...Help us get some technology working somewhere and we're happy to pay you some money'. Darden also explicity denies that he told Rossi "Let's start the GPT".


    Regarding the LEGAL aspects, this testimony conflicts with Rossi's assertion that IH did not inform him that Doral was not a GPT.


    One thing is for sure. Both parties cannot be telling the truth. One or both must be making an untrue claim. In this context, this is a crime, separate from the outcome of this case.


    Also, from the ROSSI EFFECT standpoint, Darden's testimony supports IH's claim that they could not achieve any excess heat.


    From the PSYCHOSOCIAL aspect, one or both parties are at risk of criminal perjury.


    Interesting.

  • I believe I'm pretty specific when I say that this has been sorted out and that I can not go into details on it. As far as I can see the only reason for IH to bring that mail into the lawsuit was to damage the relationship between Ross and HF. And it failed. What is interesting though is the fact that they bothered to include it, because there are no other reasons than to cause damage. (and why would it be in the interest for IH do that? ... )


    I guess, Sifferkoll, what is interesting in this thread is not your personal view of Rossi's credibility, but whether he has evidence that will stand up in Court to counteract the bad impression from that e-mail?


    interested in your view,

    THH

  • Afraid of an Israeli business man who asks if Levi wants a job, and it is called a threat and witness tampering.


    oldguy : This is Trump-logic: Levi is a prof, what can a "business mafiosi" propose him?? A job in heaven?


    If any body else -- not a jew -- would have asked Levi, then he would have kicked they guy in the ass!


    Sorry, it was easy to misread your comment as racist. I put it back. Eric