Jed,
You keep repeating that what you say is absolutely true despite the
errors I pointed out in Exhibit 5.
Contrary to what you write, it would be to Rossi's advantage for IH to
summit errors of fact. It would not be in Penon's interest to correct
them with a court case pending, without legal guidance.
Short of reading the contract, you don't know if Penon was obligated to
talk to an outside consultant. Murray has never claimed he was employed
directly by IH.
On 8/9/2016 10:32 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
There are several reasons why Penon might have declined to answer
Murray.
No, there are no reasons. He was being paid to respond to Murray. He
was contractually obligated. He and Rossi must have known that if he
did not respond to that document would be used in a lawsuit against
them, which they were planning at that time. If there are any mistakes
or misunderstandings in that document, it was extremely important for
them to respond and correct these mistakes.
There are no mistakes. Every assertion in that document is correct,
and damning.
