Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

    Regarding evidence that is uncontested, this is in Document 280: 'Joint pre-trial stipulation'.


    These are facts that all parties (Rossi, IH and Third Parties) agree to - in other words, these are undisputed facts regarding this case:


    90. During the period when the 1 MW Plant was tested and operated in the Doral Facility, Rossi:

    a. Distinguished J.M. Products from Leonardo and Rossi in communications with Counter-Plaintiffs and with others, and instructed others to make the same distinctions in communications with Counter-Plaintiffs;

    b. Held out Bass as J.M. Products’ “Director of Engineering” to Counter-Plaintiffs;

    c. Represented to Counter-Plaintiffs that J.M. Products had its own operations independent from Leonardo and a use for the 1 MW Plant’s steam;

    d. Represented to Counter-Plaintiffs that J.M. Products was satisfied by the steam it was receiving from the 1 MW Plant.


    93. During the period when the 1 MW Plant was tested and operated in the Doral Facility, Rossi controlled J.M. Products’ technical and product development activities, as well as J.M. Products’ day-to-day activities;


    94. J.M. Products has never been owned by Johnson Matthey or controlled by a trust formed in the United Kingdom; it has always been owned by the Platinum American Trust.


    95. J.M. Products has never been a subsidiary of Johnson Matthey.


    96. Johnson Matthey has never had an ownership interest in J.M. Products.


    Also, it is undisputed that Dott. Rossi sent an email to IH on June 10, 2014 (Document 236-28) excerpted below:


    "...we have a Customer who pays 1,000 $/day to rent the 1 MW plant, put in his factory in Miami, produce catalyzers that he sells. I will direct the operation of the plant for the first year, the contract will be for 3 years, renewable. The Customer will not have access to the reactors, that will remain under our full control for maintenance and recharge.

    For the permissions, I have already got the necessary instructions along what I already had been told before, as you know....


    And subsequently, it is not disputed (it is uncontested) that Dott. Rossi sent a follow up email to IH on June 23, 2014 (same document) below:


    "Dear All:

    As a matter of fact we do not have 60-90 days to decide, because our Customer told me he has to start the drying line in September, therefore he must know now if we want to rent him our plant or not. He needs to prepare the factory in Florida with a dryer to be coupled with our plant, under my direction, and this work has to be started as soon as possible, while the upgrading of the 1MW plant is in course, so that as soon as our 1 MW plant upgraded will be ready by the first week of September, as agreed, we will be both ready to start up the drying line within the half of September for the preliminar [sic] tests. Otherwise the Customer is going to go ahead along his classis [sic] systems.

    Considering the fact that from August 2013, when Leonardo has delivered the plant ready to go, Industrial Heat has not got the possibility to find a real Customer and the necessary permissions to install a LENR plant, I think it is important for all of us take this opportunity in serious consideration.

    I hope you have a prompt reply with your decision.

    Warmest Regards,

    Andrea



    Now, to be clear:

    1. 'we have a Customer'

    • And that customer is Dott. Rossi, but he didn't disclose that to IH, and this is clear deception on Rossi's part.

    2. 'put in his factory in Miami' -

    • there was no factory. There wasn't even a warehouse. Dott. Rossi didn't lease the Doral warehouse until 10 weeks later (August 30, 2014 - Document 207.46). After he leased it and subleased it to himself as JMP, it still wasn't a factory that produced anything that anyone purchased (according to Rossi, nobody purchased any product from JMP).
    • the 'his' is Dott. Rossi himself and this is clear deception.

    3. 'therefore he must know now if we want to rent him our plant our not. He needs to prepare the factory in Florida with a dryer to be coupled with our plant, under my direction, and this work has to be started as soon as possible,'

    • again, throughout the email, Dott. Rossi is referring to himself as 'him', which is clearly deception on Dott. Rossi's part.
    • 'he must know now'. and 'this work has to be started as soon as possible'. Dott. Rossi is claiming that this is urgent, but he hasn't even rented the warehouse to himself and JMP yet.
    • 'He [Dott. Rossi himself] needs to prepare the factory [that doesn't exist yet] in Florida with a dryer [crude serpentine pipes that don't exist yet that Rossi himself will design and have built] to be coupled with our plant, under my direction [context shows he is talking about 'directing' the 1MW plant, NOT JMP]'

    4. 'The Customer will not have access to the reactors, that will remain under our full control'

    • Dott. Rossi intentionally deceives IH, as he is fully aware that he, who is the 'Customer', will have full access to the 1 MW reactors.
    • Dott. Rossi clearly (from any plain understanding of the words) differentiates himself from the Customer in the pharase 'under our full control'.

    5. 'For the permissions, I have already got the necessary instructions along what I already had been told before, as you know....'

    • Further intentional deception, as the only 'necessary instructions' were created by Rossi himself
    • Further intentional deception as he states 'what I already had been told before' by the company JMP, which as Dott. Rossi has now declared, is himself.

    6. 'we do not have 60-90 days to decide, because our Customer told me he has to start the drying line in September'

    • Dott. Rossi intentionally deceives IH, as 'our Customer told me' when he is talking about himself (talking to himself??).
    • Dott. Rossi intentionally deceives IH into thinking that there is an urgent requirement to decide because the Customer needed to start the drying line 'in September', but the Customer was himself, had no warehouse yet, never had a factory at all (to this day), and had no product to sell that required drying (to this day).


    7. 'Otherwise the Customer is going to go ahead along his classis [sic] systems.'

    • Dott. Rossi intentionally deceives IH by implying that the customer is not Rossi (plain reading) and that IH risks missing out if they don't decide to take advantage of this 'real customer' soon [the Customer with no warehouse, no factory, and directed by Dott. Rossi himself].

    English Language Dictionary definitions of scam and scammer:


    scam:

    skam/
    noun informal    1) a dishonest scheme; a fraud.


    scammer:

    1) a person who uses a confidence game or other fraudulent scheme, especially for making a quick profit.

    2) a person who cheats or defrauds with a scam.


    Contextual Example (mine): Dottore Andrea Rossi is a scammer who's scam involved deceiving IH to enter into a rental of heat in order to fraudulently attempt to gain $89 Million dollars and triple damages and court costs, through legal estoppel of a similar but factually distinct and not fully executed legal contract.


    Conclusion: The uncontested evidence now recorded in a US Federal Court clearly shows that Dottore Andrea Rossi is accurately defined as a 'scammer'.


    P.S., there happens to also be mountains of additional evidence to support this accurate description of Rossi, but this will have to do for now.

    Quote from Shane D.

    Even more unnecessary for a mod to allude to libel, against anyone that thinks Rossi is a criminal. IMO, LF took a big hit today because of Rends comments. Worse is that in this case his is an empty threat . . .

    I do not think it was a threat. He was not threatening to turn in anyone. He was merely stating that he considered it libel, and he went on to say that in Germany this is a criminal offense, that might be punished with jail time. In the U.S. it is a civil offense, so the government cannot punish anyone for it. Also, in the U.S., the attacks on Rossi here would never be considered libel (or any kind of defamation of character) because there is a mountain of evidence pointing to his guilt. You do not need a court case to accuse someone of a civil or criminal offense. Even if he is found innocent in I.H. counter-suit, people are still free to say he is guilty.


    If we were to accuse him of enslaving children in the (nonexistent) basement of a Pizzeria, that might be considered libel. See:


    http://www.snopes.com/pizzagate-conspiracy/


    (It is not libel in this case because the accused are public figures.)


    If you were to sue everyone who has said bad things about Rossi, it would have to be a class action lawsuit.

    Quote from we_cat_global

    People that know Andrea Rossi well, stay on his side. No matter what.

    This is a very important point. It is also misconstrued as to real context of the statement, or at least which side of the scales does the "stay with him" balance!


    If Rossi really had what he states, surely people that have worked with him that are educated* and knowledgeable* about the areas

    required to determine the validity of his claims, will have stayed with him and assisted to promote a world changing technology!

    (* anonymous posters on blogs are not counted as there is no true evidence of their validity)


    What do we know about this subject of who supports Rossi, once he gets to know them? Let's see if we can make a list and people should add / correct as I certainly may have left some out or been unaware of others.


    "Pro-Rossi list" : People who have and continue to publicly endorse not only Rossi but the eCat technology. These are people who have personally met and worked with Rossi and have continued to publicly endorse him.


    1) Penon - Long time associate. Has high education and credentials. Has worked with both Rossi and the eCats.

    2) Fabiani - Long time family friend and associate. Has higher education some credentials. Has worked with both Rossi and the eCats.

    3)Mats Lewan - Journalist with higher educations. Has worked with Rossi, very limited eCat exposure that turned out to be somewhat negative. (measurement errors)

    4) Focardi - Respected physicists and by far the most esteemed Rossi collaborator. Unfortunately, deceased and unknown as to how much he was involved in later eCat claims.


    ----


    "Unknown Rossi list" : People who have worked or supposedly have worked with Rossi and the eCat. However they have not publicly supported him nor have they continued to publicly endorse him. However, they have not publicly disavowed him either.

    1) Lugano team - 7 professors of various disciplines that at one time were thought to have run a very convincing test. A favorable report was published but has since been found severely lacking. It has come to light that the team did not run the test, but Rossi and Fabiani conducted the entire test, with only two or three of the Lugano team stopping by on an unknown number of times. They have not made any public statements since, pro or con. They have not defended the criticisms of the report. "Their silence is deafening."

    2) Norman Cook - Highly educated, wrote a preliminary paper on theory concerning the eCat. Rossi once highly touted this relationship. It is now in an unknown status. Cook has not publicly endorsed Rossi that I know of since much of what has came out in the lawsuit. Rossi seems to have moved on to an undergrad to write theory papers.

    3) Gullstrom - An undergrad student that pre-published a paper from Rossi supplied numbers. Reviews of the paper are not very complimentary. Gullstrom has made no public statements about Rossi, the eCat or even the QuarkX that I am aware of.

    4) Several "engineers" from military to aerospace that Rossi has touted has consulted with him. None have ever came forward to endorse Rossi nor have they publicly stated anything. We do not even know if they are real. Based upon evidence, past and present, these individuals were probably not "real" in a relevant manner.

    5) National Instruments - Touted once by Rossi as a major partner, they walked away.

    6) Seimens - Once proclaimed by Rossi as a partner, they walked away.

    7) Nasa - Attending a demo by Rossi and proclaimed by him as purchasing a plant, they walked away.


    ----

    "Rossi nay sayers" : People who have actually worked with Rossi and had very bad dealings with him. They have publicly stated their position either about Rossi himself or about the eCat technology.

    1) IH - Has had the most intimate, hands on experience of any known entity. We all know the situation!

    2) Piantelli - Certainly has publicly denounced Rossi, but I am unsure as to how much actual interaction they have had.

    3) Prometeon - Licensee that publicly started they were reneged on by Rossi. They did not have technical inside information that I know of.

    4) Hydrofusion - Publicly stated that test data was incorrect and that test results where invalid. Unknown as to current status, so they might fit in the above category.



    So as one who has followed this story since 2011, I find almost NO one who has publicly endorsed Rossi and continues to do so. Only three people publicly endorsing the most world changing technology in the past 200 years! Really?


    A large list of entities that have had dealings with Rossi and they have nothing to say! Again, concerning this world changing technology. AND they walk away from it! That is certainly telling.


    And a few people that have had very close, very intricate dealings with Rossi and they have nothing good to say. Are there others?


    In any case, Rossi DOES NOT have a support base from people who have worked with him..... only those on blogs who want his tech to be real, so they support him in absentia!

    • Official Post
    Quote from Shane D.

    Even more unnecessary for a mod to allude to libel, against anyone that thinks Rossi is a criminal. IMO, LF took a big hit today because of Rends comments. Worse is that in this case his is an empty threat, but nonetheless the damage is done, and there will be those who will refrain from commenting as a result. Especially those that go by their real name. Shameful really.


    Shane D. We all live by different codes, and different standards of behaviour. In general I find that in Europe there is a tendency refrain from name-calling as in 'scammer' and a certain pride in seeking more subtle ways of expressing our opinions of other people. The end result is much the same, if you are attuned to the culture. I tend to agree with Rends on this matter, not particularly in regard to Rossi the confidence trickster (see that's not so hard is it?:|) but to anybody living person who is discussed in this space. Once we abandon politesse we begin the abandonment of our better natures.


    As for LF taking a 'big hit' , it has survived - and will survive - worse I am sure. Damage (and I fail to see there is any beyond a pin-prick in a soap bubble ) will soon heal, so long as some kind of civilised standards of debate are maintained.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    Shane D. We all live by different codes, and different standards of behaviour. In general I find that in Europe there is a tendency refrain from name-calling as in 'scammer' and a certain pride in seeking more subtle ways of expressing our opinions of other people. The end result is much the same, if you are attuned to the culture. I tend to agree with Rends on this matter, not particularly in regard to Rossi the confidence trickster (see that's not so hard is it?:|) but to anybody living person who is discussed in this space. Once we abandon politesse we begin the abandonment of our better natures.


    As for LF taking a 'big hit' , it has survived - and will survive - worse I am sure. Damage (and I fail to see there is any beyond a pin-prick in a soap bubble ) will soon heal, so long as some kind of civilised standards of debate are maintained.


    As a European, I'd agree.


    Rossi has deceived multiple business partners. In the case of IH we know that this deception was deliberate and clearly directed towards something that (Rossi claims) will make them give him $89M or more.


    No other words needed.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    In general I find that in Europe there is a tendency refrain from name-calling as in 'scammer' and a certain pride in seeking more subtle ways of expressing our opinions of other people.


    Well, on this issue, perhaps predictably as a U.S. citizen, I find little attractive, admirable, or worthy of pride in using less accurate euphemisms rather than informal but accurate adjectives regarding Dott. Rossi.


    And one important reason is because it is quite likely that Rossi, even if he loses this case in all respects, is never convicted of fraud. Heck, it's even possible (extremely unlikely, but possible), that he might even win his suit against IH.


    But even if that happens, Rossi is still accurately described as a scammer. Based on facts, evidence and a plain use of the English language.


    That's why I satirically brought up the anti-gravity proposal. Just because a system, regime, or government decides or constrains something (2 + 2 = 5, as George's example) doesn't necessarily make it true.


    And, in my opinion, in debate, (which is what a Forum is designed for), evidence-based, plain, clear and accurate communication and reasoning should take precedent over politeness.


    But I confess that aiming for both is also good, and that my tendencies may be a bit lopsided. (Can I blame that on my country of origin?). And I can sometimes learn from your example to do better.


    So the 'European perspective' is not completely lost on me, even as I'm firmly committed ideologically to sticking with an apologetic for accuracy and truth (as best I can discern it and refine it through discussion, debate and research) over politeness or social or political 'correctness'.


    And (if it wasn't obvious), positing rules that intentionally or unintentionally quell honest, earnest, and evidence-supported debate is offensive to my First Amendment sensibilities.


    (And I'm not talking about total license here, as falsely yelling 'fire' in a theater, for example, is rightly not protected speech - but nothing like that is in play here).


    And finally, perhaps the greatest body of work poking fun at British overly-polite euphemisms contradicting reality comes from Monty Python. Which I find humorous, but always suspected that I couldn't quite appreciate as much as a native Brit. There's so much to choose from this outstanding body of work, but here's a classic:


    The Visitors

    • Official Post
    Quote from sigmoidal

    I find little attractive, admirable, or worthy of pride in using less accurate euphemisms regarding Dott. Rossi.


    What is euphemistic or innacurate about the term 'confidence trickster'? It describes far more accurately the nature of the complaints about the good Dottore's conduct. And it is not a euphemism in any English speaking culture I know of. If you really believe that 'clear and accurate communication and reasoning' is required I think it more fit for purpose than many of the terms used in vernacular speech.


    But personally I am more worried about the great apostrophe scandal.

    Quote from Dewey Weaver

    As we have been known to say on our planet - "the crux of the biscuit is the apostrophe?


    Italians don't underestimate the importance of an apostrophe since the release of the best ever Italian translation of Rostand's Cyrano de Bergerac by M. Giobbe, where Cyrano says, "What is a kiss? [...] A pink apostrophe placed between the words "T'amo".

    (Un apostrofo rosa messo tra le parole "T'amo").


    However Rostand was originally concerned about dotting the i's.

    "Un point rose qu'on met sur l'i du verbe aimer."

    @Bob,


    Thanks, nice list. Indeed, i think it is an important point. The effort you made is appreciated. I'd like to continue this exercise. For the sake of simplicity i have summarized your list. However, i made some changes. Underneath the "lists" i explained the changes. I am curious what you and others think.


    Pro

    1. Penon
    2. Fabiani
    3. Gullström
    4. Lewan
    5. Hydro Fusion
    6. Levi
    7. Focardi

    Con

    1. IH
    2. Piantelli
    3. Prometeon


    Neutral

    1. Group of Lugano Profs
    2. Former interested parties (NASA, NI, Boeing, Siemens, etc.)
    3. Cook


    Remarks


    1. Gullström is an ally. One does not have to be publishing friendships in newspapers to be on somebody's side. Co-writing a paper with them says enough. Perhaps therefore Norman Cook should be part of the "Pro" team as well, but since the paper he wrote with Rossi was from some time back we keep him in "Neutral" for now.
    2. Hydro Fusion is still in the Rossi camp. They host his website if i am not mistaken and still market E-Cat products on their side. Chances are that he is working with them in Sweden.
    3. Levi is in Team Rossi. He notifies him when he feels harassed by IH's Israelis and is on Rossi's possible witness list.
    4. Piantelli and Prometeon are according to you anti-rossi. I cannot counter that with evidence, but perhaps others can. Shouldn't Prometeon have an issue with IH instead of Rossi? IH handled the buying--off of former licensees, right? (edit: Indeed, some googling showed that Prometeon are no friends of Rossi).
    5. I have grouped the parties that Rossi mentioned as partners or that actually were interested. I think that Rossi's hope dictates his thinking sometimes and that the interaction with these parties was not always as intensive as he wanted us to believe. IH sending Boeing a reactor is interesting though.

    Cheers,


    JB

    Stating that LENR is a hoax is a much different than stating Rossi is a fraud or scammer. There are many comments on ECW which express doubts in Rossi's veracity. I find the bias here in favor of IH much more troubling than that.

    Shane D.,


    "Political Correctness" has nothing to do with this discussion. At least from my point of view. The blunter and the more explicit the better. Call Rossi (or IH and affiliates for that matter) whatever you want to call them. Go for it.


    One can debate however if explicitness works on a forum like the one we are filling. The mods of this forum are doing a fine job in my opinion and seem to work with a set of dynamic rules in combination with wit and knowledge. All fine.


    What is annoying me are the half truths that confuse the core question.


    Can Rossi create and control an LENR reaction or is he only simulating he can?


    I haven't seen the indisputable proof that he is a simulant. Sure, a lot of noise, sometimes pretty loud, but no signal yet. On the other hand there is proof, at least to me there is, that others know more. The replicators, the people close to Rossi and most importantly IH and affiliates.


    Thomas Darden and Co. show such ambivalent behaviour that i am personally sure there is more going on than what we see. A lot more. Actually IH, by all their accusations, threats and preparing actions, prove to me that there is great value in Rossi's IP.


    One day we will be able to conclude the above question. It will take a few more years perhaps, but IH's post-trial actions, the LENR field dying of slowly but surely or a replicator will answer the question for us.


    Ultimately I am fine having to accept that Rossi is a scammer. I would hate however, to see others bear the fruits of his work.


    Cheers,


    JB



    • Official Post

    Well, if the European contingent finds calling Rossi a scammer, or criminally minded, undignified after all the dishonest things he has done...I can see why your cultures are in such trouble. Rossi is a special case. Other than MY, the same people like myself calling Rossi out for what he is, have been very proper, and forgiving when discussing others.


    Rossi evokes an intense response from most, for very obvious reasons, and sugar coating his actions by addressing him more neutrally would not feel right. Sometimes, as in this case, you just have to call a person for what he is, and damn what others think.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Rionrlty

    Stating that LENR is a hoax is a much different than stating Rossi is a fraud or scammer. There are many comments on ECW which express doubts in Rossi's veracity. I find the bias here in favor of IH much more troubling than that.


    So how much longer will you go on complaining of bias here against Rossi, without ever addressing the things he has done that have made us biased? Sig had a very good post today, where he laid out a few of Rossi's documented deceits against IH, all of which were uncontested by Rossi's lawyers. It is not hearsay, as it is in the court docket and thereby facts. Lots more where that came from BTW, but we will stick to just those.


    How about reviewing that one post, and give us your opinion as to whether we are being too harsh on Rossi .

    • Official Post

    WCG,


    That last post was a bit wandering.


    On another matter, I responded to you today regarding your other post about Fabiani/employed/chemist/Upssala. You did not respond...yet again. Troubling pattern. You raise something, I answer, I respond, you do not. Seems almost common among Rossi supporters...IHFB being an exception, although his exceptions are sometimes a stretch. :)


    So, is our Fulvio Fabiani, the same Fabiani that is the employed Analytical Chemist at UU, as Ahlfors suggests?

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.