Incorrect. Evidence from both sides has already been uploaded. Rossi upload fraudulent evidence from Penon. If he had non-fraudulent evidence to back up his case, he would have uploaded it.
Incorrect. Some evidence will sneak in before the evidentiary phase. But the time for presenting evidence comes later. The answers during the proceedings are primarily to admit/deny the allegations.
I'm surprised at how imperceptive you are on this one. You are usually more on task.
Yes, yes. But Penon said it was atmospheric, i.e., 0 kPaG.
No, Penon never responded. He said nothing. Murray gave Penon the benefit of the doubt and assumed it was supposed to mean barG, but Penon did not confirm that.
Anyway, that paper says 0.0 bar. The one you are looking at right there! It does not say 0.0 barG. If that is wrong, Rossi should have corrected it before uploading, or inserted a note explaining the mistake.
Besides, even if it did mean barG, it would still be impossible.
Besides, even if it did mean barG, it would still be impossible.
No, it would not be.
But the time for presenting evidence comes later.
So why did Rossi upload Penon's fraudulent data? It destroyed his own case! If the time to present data comes later, why did he upload spreadsheets that prove he is a criminal fraud?
I assume he thinks he can bamboozle people with this data. Obviously, he has bamboozled you and Peter Gluck, so perhaps he is right about that.
No, it would not be.
Yes, it would be impossible for the reasons given by Murray. That is why he pointed this out. You do not understand these reasons, but they prove the data is fake.
Murray gave Penon the benefit of the doubt and assumed it was supposed to mean barG . . .
That is not correct. The author of Exhibit 5 stated: "You [Penon] stated that the pressure of the steam that was available to J.M. Products (JMP) was nominally atmospheric pressure (0 kilo Pascals gauge (kPaG) or 14.7 psia)."
The author of Exhibit 5 did not say: "I assume the pressure was supposed to mean barG."
These are diametrically different.
Contrast this with what the author of Exhibit 5 said about the pipe size: "and the piping is DN40." There, the author of Exhibit 5 is affirmatively stating that the piping was DN40. As I've shown on this forum, that claim is likely false.
Yes, it would be impossible for the reasons given by Murray. That is why he pointed this out. You do not understand these reasons, but they prove the data is fake.
No, it would not be impossible, despite what Murray (an apparent non-expert in these matters) states. You don't understand how heat exchangers work.
Rossi is correct in declining to answer any questions relating to the case.
Was he correct when he declined to answer any questions before filing the case? If he has valid answers that will bring him $89 million, do you think it was wise for him to refuse to provide any of these answers, and instead to file a lawsuit that he may well lose? To me, that seems like a crazy thing to do.
Why not resolve all of the issues in Exhibit 5 first, explaining everything to I.H? Then, if they do not pay, he would be in a much stronger position to file a lawsuit.
Rossi denied it during the proceedings.
I almost hate to repeat.... but remember... Rossi brought the trial, not IH. IH only has to defend. Rossi has to prove! They have defended every accusation and Rossi has not answered those defenses. Rossi is now in very serious jeopardy of having his suit thrown out before your evidentiary phase ever starts. Lawsuits do not automatically go to jury trial! IH can ask for a summary judgement and if the judge determines Rossi is "full of it", the judge can throw the suit out. So far Rossi has not backed up his lawsuit with data. IH has countered.
Also, Rossi did not explicitly deny the charges. He stated the standard response he stated on the vast majority of his answers :
"Plaintiffs lack sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the Counterclaim and therefore deny the same and demand strict proof thereof. "
So he did not answer. If he had the information, he could have said. "we deny this. the pipe is DN150" He did not. He stated he lacked sufficient knowledge!
So, I must agree with Jed. Rossi cannot defend it. Penon did not respond or correct it before the lawsuit ever came about. If Rossi could show a photo, the judge could immediately dismiss that part of IH's argument when considering summary judgement. Now, will the judge consider that Rossi is "full of it" because he did not answer?
In either case, Rossi did not answer, could have and would have IF he had the information that would have helped his case. 
IH on the countersuit however, will have to provide evidence and they are. They have submitted information to the judge. The judge can (and I believe eventually will) throw out Rossi's case but continue with IH's as IH is providing the judge with evidence. We will see.
But Penon said it
As you request from others... where is it documented? "Rossi says"? 
That is not correct. The author of Exhibit 5 stated: "You [Penon] stated that the pressure of the steam that was available to J.M. Products (JMP) was nominally atmospheric pressure (0 kilo Pascals gauge (kPaG) or 14.7 psia)."
You are looking at the data, RIGHT HERE. The data provided by Rossi himself. You believe everything Rossi says. It says 0.0 bar. That is a vacuum. 0.0 psia.
If it was meant to say something else, and that was a typo, the units should have been either corrected or noted. This is evidence provided in a multimillion dollar lawsuit. You don't leave a critical mistake in a document without even a notation.
Put aside what Murray said in Exhibit 5 in this instance, and look at what Rossi himself said in the document he uploaded. If Murray was right and it was supposed to be 0.0 barG, that's impossible. If it was supposed to be 0.0 bar (a vacuum) that is even more impossible. Which is it? And why the hell does it matter?
@Jed,
No, again, not correct. You can't assume that 0.0 bar means an absolute vacuum--you simply can't.
The bar is a metric unit of pressure, but is not approved as part of the International System of Units (SI). It is defined as exactly equal to 100000 Pa, which is slightly less than the current average atmospheric pressure on Earth at sea level.[1][2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_(unit)
And no, not impossible if it was at nominally atmospheric pressures, no matter how many times you repeat it.
Rossi is correct in declining
Rossi is in serious jeopardy of having his case issued a summary judgement if he gives the judge nothing. The judge has already threatened sanctions on him.
AND my understanding is that one must produce all evidence during this phase so the defense can prepare. That is why Rossi asked for so much information from IH, he was fishing. IH asked for hard evidence such as the actual recorded data and Rossi had refused to turn it over, after (3) requests! Wonder why?
Now, we may not see all the evidence published in the court documents true, but the court participants will see it before trial.
So based upon my limited understanding, Rossi is would not be correct in declining at this late in the game. Since the judge threatened sanctions, I believe that position is correct.
There are claims and there are counterclaims
Yes and Rossi could have had much of IH's assertions thrown out early with just a few pieces of evidence to the judge. Such as proving there was a "real company".
Such as the answers to Murray's questions, etc. etc. My opinion is that summary judgement on Rossi's case is far from zero but actually quite realistic.
I assume that you mean the atmospheric pressure comes from here:
"You stated that the pressure of the steam that was available to J.M. Products (JMP) was nominally atmospheric pressure (0 kilo Pascals gauge (kPaG) or 14.7 psia)."
-Murray letter, Exhibit 5
(To which there was no reply.)
This is the same source as the 40DN pipe. Why should this document be any more reliable for pressure than pipe sizes?
How does the steam flow anywhere without a pressure differential? How is a large open pipe sufficient to prevent pressure equalization between JMP and the Plant? There must be a local restriction in order to maintain a relative vacuum somewhere, so that steam being made at the the Plant at atmospheric pressure (at a rate of something like 0.7 m^3/s) will move along and not pressurize.
Because Rossi knew that IH had no plans to pay.
What you say makes no business sense.
Even if he knew this, it would be wise to answer the letter from Murray and provide the data showing that all of the issues raised by Murray were invalid. This would put him in a much stronger position to win the lawsuit. It is common sense in business to give the customer an opportunity to pay before you file a lawsuit for non-payment. Even if you are sure the customer will not pay, you still need to show that you gave him an opportunity and good reasons to pay. You need to take away any excuse the customer might give for refusing payment.
By not responding, Rossi handed I.H. a club they can bludgeon him with. Then he uploaded the fake data -- another club they can whack him with. He is making their case for them. If he had valid data he should have uploaded that instead.
Display More
I assume that you mean the atmospheric pressure comes from here:
"You stated that the pressure of the steam that was available to J.M. Products (JMP) was nominally atmospheric pressure (0 kilo Pascals gauge (kPaG) or 14.7 psia)."
-Murray letter, Exhibit 5
(To which there was no reply.)
This is the same source as the 40DN pipe. Why should this document be any more reliable for pressure than pipe sizes?
See: Rossi vs. Darden developments - Part 2
QuoteDisplay MoreHow does the steam flow anywhere without a pressure differential? How is
a large open pipe sufficient to prevent pressure equalization between
JMP and the Plant? There must be a local restriction in order to
maintain a relative vacuum somewhere, so that steam being made at the
the Plant at atmospheric pressure (at a rate of something like 0.7
m^3/s) will move along and not pressurize.
The heat exchanger can create enough of a vacuum and pressure differential to move the steam from the reactor to the heat exchanger. I'm not the only one stating this. Others on ECW and elsewhere have explained this.
