Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: > If you listen to Brillouin, the Rossi technology works like a charm. > When and where did they say that!?? I have met with the Brillouin people. As far as I know, they think Rossi is criminal fraud. - Jed

RE: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Jones— I agree with you that the crux of the trial is about fulfilling a contract, not about validity of technical data taking, recording and interpretation. Darden, Vaughan etal. all agreed with the year long testing and the ERV. The technical issues do not matter and could only get in the

RE: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Jed— You said, ” I have met with the Brillouin people. As far as I know, they think Rossi is criminal fraud.” Is as far as you know based on actual statements regarding the fraud status of Rossi? Bob Cook

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: > You said, > > > > ” I have met with the Brillouin people. As far as I know, they think Rossi > is criminal fraud.” > > > > Is as far as you know based on actual statements regarding the fraud > status of > > Rossi? > I don't think we

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Jones Beene wrote: > > Whoa. The ERV report is not really self-evident proof of anything to a > jury - other than that it supposedly provides a basis for Penon's > conclusion. These are average citizens who don't do data, so to speak. > I hope you are wrong about that, but

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Jones Beene wrote: But ... the big issue is this: can an ill-conceived contract be interpreted > by a jury to overlook the actual results (to imply that only the ERV's > conclusion matters, not the substance of the report) ? > > The World

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:45 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > >> There aren't that many rules over here on Vortex but even still, some >> of your more vociferous and full-of-shit members over there have been >> banned from Vortex,

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > Comments get moved to another thread without notification. > Commenters can get put "on probation" without notification. You > yourself are a moderator but it doesn't say that on your title. You > allow insults

RE: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Adrian— My thought’s parallel yours. IMHO the IH corporate shield will NOT work to protect Darden and Vaughan, however. They would suffer bankruptcy as well. Bob Cook Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Adrian

RE: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Gentleman: Any contract requires good faith. If the report and test wasn’t created in good faith (with a reasonable attempt at complying with scientific standards), it won’t be sufficient. Penon was identified as independent, if he wasn’t then the contract for Rossi will not be

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Yes of course. An "obvious fraud" will not fly, but if artfully done - it could be a question that goes to the jury. This outcome of bad data passing off as good may be unlikely, but so was various facts that led to OJ, Rodney King, Casey Anthony and other jury surprises. In short, juries can

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Jones, I had thought much the same thing. If the ERV's report is the deciding factor in the contract it will be difficult to put it aside. Both sides paid/agreed on the man. I also agree IH will appeal it for ever if they lose - and ultimately declare chapter 11 if they lose, rather than

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

What are the possibilities that LENR is moved forward? Rossi wins because he supposedly fulfilled the contract, gaining interest from the press. Rossi loses and IH is free to pursue other LENR opportunities. Split-the-baby decision, both sides limping away with Status Quo Ante Bellum. All the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Jones Beene wrote: > This should be an epic trial, but it appears that people are expecting > that it will end with the general public knowing whether the Rossi > technology works or not. > Anyone can see it does not work. The Penon report is proof of that. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Jed Rothwell wrote: Jones Beenewrote: This should be an epic trial, but it appears that people are expecting that it will end with the general public knowing whether the Rossi technology works or not. Anyone can see it does not work. The Penon report is proof of that. Whoa.