Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • You are convinced of this despite the fact that if they had replicated, they would have been happy to pay and they would presently be spending hundreds of millions of dollars developing the technology. Instead of firing their technical staff and closing down the R&D, as Murray testified.


    IH closed up shop and boxed everything up on order of their lawyers in response to the lawsuit. Murray had only about a few months to test his modified version of the e-Cat, while Dameron was still running the IH-built reactor in the same building.

  • I like your thought, but have to take issue with one thing: while there has been damning evidence against Rossi, I believe there has been an equally amount of damning evidence against IH. Take for example, Darden's claim that he knew it didn't work in January of 2014 because the dummy reactor allegedly gave the same performance as a fueled reactor, but then would go on to raise tens of millions of outside investment based on Rossi's technology. Darden isn't playing straight. Something is amiss.

    You have mistakenly posted in the wrong thread.


    This belongs in the "Woodford vs Darden Developments" thread.

    (you know, the one that will be started when Woodford sues IH

    for their 50 million back, alleging IH of fraudulent inducement.)


    Unless you think Woodford is too stupid to get their easy win money back.


    Pete

  • PIH,


    Someone posted something awhile back suggesting that IH has already clawed back some of the money. I don't have a link and don't know how good the source was. But at the end of the day, I tend to think Darden was exaggerating the dummy reactor story in a self-serving after-the-fact sort of way, without thinking about the implications.

  • I don't know how well resting on "liking" Rossi to support his attack on IH. I know that I have working in/with/among LENR people for a long time and my immediate reaction to Rossi was to check and make sure my wallet was safe. He gave me the creeps and his science was laughable. However, that is a view from a science guy and not a just a guy off the street. I know that poor me, I'm the victim is a current trend in society but I am not sure it will work 100% to his advantage. Remember it only takes one on the jury to mistrust a convicted guy with a toupee.


    If the jury is like the group here, then it will be an easy win for IH (just look how divided the posts are) since it must be unanimous verdict to convict in the Fed court. Rossi made a mistake going to a Fed court instead of a state court if he is trusting his "smooth poor me, I am not sure of the English" to win for him.

  • You may want to check your info. I think (this applies to all that follows-not sure though) that Woodford's money is not in IH accounts,.... it is "parked" in the UK. It has only been released in parts to IH for some of the other IH researchers and projects. If IH declares bankruptcy due to a bad verdict (doubtful at this time) then there will be very few IH assets to attach.

  • IHFB - wrong on all points again laddie - you are one of the most prolific assumptive fabricating spinsters in this entire saga. Attorneys are not ordering anybody except on Planet Rossi where the R'Ster cannot comment by orders of the attorneys except where comments can be made under the guise of the no comment monicker ( gets me every time he does that - so damn funny....).


    The R'ster is not going to be able to spin his way out of being caught in the lie of a high COP from an empty reactor anywhere except Sweden from here on out.

  • It is the only reason for the JMP ruse. What other purpose would it have had? Rossi had to manufacture an inducement for IH because the original contract was so poorly drafted. This whole deal was bound to fail from the moment pen met paper.


    If the Jury see it this way they will be bound to see Rossi guilty of fraudulent inducement (?) or something similar. The contract was drafted, by Rossi, since it gives him the money up-front which he wanted. No VC would ever want such a contract because it adds risk and reduces any incentive for the inventor to provide ongoing help.


    Rossi can play the poor inventor exploited card. But only if his stuff works. He has put forward zero evidence of that to refure IH saying it does not.


    One thing those here who believe Rossi's stuff works don't get is that most people will not so believe. They will reckon if this stuff did work it would be used somewhere. IH can easily show that no-one has got LENR to work in any usable sense, and there is no scientific consensus that it works even as a lab curiosity.

  • IHFB - The R'ster and his goldboy, Pizzato, got caught smuggling 2 tons of bullion out of Italy and you know that was not their only

    run. Only on Planet Rossi does this count as "proper commerce". I should add that we've learned that R's goldboy Pizzatto also got arrested at the Miami International Airport on a German warrant for money laundering and precious metal trafficking. That one cost Pizzato some prison time as well. What was he doing in Miami - seeking pinball software training?

  • You may want to check your info. I think (this applies to all that follows-not sure though) that Woodford's money is not in IH accounts,.... it is "parked" in the UK. It has only been released in parts to IH for some of the other IH researchers and projects. If IH declares bankruptcy due to a bad verdict (doubtful at this time) then there will be very few IH assets to attach.

    My comment to IH was less about Woodford vs IH,

    than it was about what THIS case is about.


    IHFB thinks this case is a toss up, because he sees "bad" in IH

    that is equivalent to R's amount of bad. (I can't say he is totally

    wrong about that, I guess, since I don't know all of IH's dealings)


    But, this case IS about $89 million for a GPT.


    It is also not about Petroldragon, NASA, kids with cancer etc.

    Neither is it about whether MFMP verify ME356s work.


    Pete

  • For those with the time and will to read it (not me) here is a link to the latest Woodford PCT annual report.

    https://static.woodfordfunds.c…-accounts-20161231-v3.pdf


    Alan Smith,


    Thanks. Not too interesting and nothing very specific on the individual investments WF made. Like most active investors they are not doing that well compared against an ever higher FTSE index. See the undoubtedly "window dressed" graph below.



    They 2% weighting of IH in their fund is substantial in my opinion. A write-off will be disastrous and if other components of their portfolio start heading south as well, will lead to redemptions (which lead to forced selling, which lead to redemptions, etc.).


    Cheers,


    JB

  • So what? There is no scientific consensus about a lot of things that involve far more cash than this. Dark matter, QM, eating dairy products, statins, the health benefits of jogging, Gwyneth Paltrow, the power of prayer, climate change, IQ testing....a long long list.


    Alan, whilst I often respect your knowledgeable contributions they do sometimes seem biased and this is particularly zany.


    OK - so I am inventor. I claim a novel device which converts rossinos into energy. I have no evidence that this device actually works, nor can demonstrate it, nor, after 5 years of claiming it works, can point to anyone other than myself with a working device.


    Also, there is no scientific consensus on the existence of rossinos (most scientists would say the experimental evidence of this is unconvincing, there is no theoretical basis). No-one else has ever made energy generators from rossinos.


    Who is going to believe my device works?

  • Does anyone know what the second position of IH in Woodfords portfolio is?

    Page 17 #48


    I highlighted it in this screenshot:


    screenshot-static.woodfordfunds.com_2017-05-15_1.jpg

  • Yes, that is the way it looks for me.


    Even if there were some IH assets to attach now, I doubt there would be any after a few years of appeals which IH would surely do.


    The attack on a large on going business with a revenue line is one thing, but an attack on a start up company which only gets money if investors want to put it in and take their risks is another. It would be so easy for IH to just declare bankruptcy and walk away. They have no stores, only a mostly empty warehouse and almost no employees to support, .... why would R think that IH would just give money (that they would ask for investors to give them) to him instead of walking away?


    My guess is he thought his old tactics would work here and Darden would hand him "go away money".


    Again the only win I can possibly see for him is to drop the suit and walk away with what money he has in his pockets. Only the lawyers will have his money after appeals even if he were to win. But if I had to make a prediction, it would be IH will not be held guilty and that Rossi and his will have to worry about the counter suit. And I would not doubt that Fabiani will try to do a deal with IH in evidence against R. I don't think he still has warm regards for Rossi after Rossi threw his computer and personal stuff out into the parking lot.

  • IHFB - wrong on all points again laddie - you are one of the most prolific assumptive fabricating spinsters in this entire saga. Attorneys are not ordering anybody except on Planet Rossi where the R'Ster cannot comment by orders of the attorneys except where comments can be made under the guise of the no comment monicker ( gets me every time he does that - so damn funny....).


    The R'ster is not going to be able to spin his way out of being caught in the lie of a high COP from an empty reactor anywhere except Sweden from here on out.


    Well, here is what Murray said:


    215-3, p. 103

    ·8· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And where is the device that you

    ·9· ·tested now, if you know?

    10· · · · A.· · I can't say today, but I know before we

    11· ·closed up shop we took everything related to the

    12· ·litigation under the direction of Jones Day and we put

    13· ·it all together, and we boxed it up and we put it into

    14· ·the locked facility in the back of the building.· So I'm

    15· ·sure it's all in there.


    Maybe Murray was referring just to boxing everything up under the direction of Jones Day. In any case, the Jones Day lawyers were quite involved at this point. Hard to say whether they suggested closing up shop. But given that everything was shut down and closed up right after the lawsuit, the timing of it all seems to suggest a causal relationship.

  • Hey genius - Rossi's junk was boxed up and stored. In your snippet driven alt universe where any truth can be assembled, don't even try to think about what was not boxed up and stored - that might not be good for your psyche or health.

  • @Dewey,


    The snippet of pertinence was provided and not taken out of context. It would be inconvenient (and not much appreciated here) had I copied and pasted Murray's entire 370 page (!) deposition into my comment.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.