If you guys are right… there is another looming problem which could end this case before it gets underway. No one seems to have mentioned this but a serious difficulty for Rossi’s attorney arises once he is informed or realizes that his client has been dishonest in the complaint – such as specific details in the pleadings about JM and Bass.
There are special rules for attorneys regarding this type of conduct, and a much higher standard applies - which can result in disbarment. For a witnesses like Penon, merely suspecting that Rossi is lying will not amount to suborning perjury. But the rules change for the attorney who learns or even suspects that his client has lied in the pleadings. Attorneys have a special duty as officers of the Court and “suborning perjury” is a term that strikes fear. Once any attorney learns that the client has lied, he cannot look the other way. The pleadings are sworn, and the attorney must immediately inform the Court… such as if he learns that JM, the “customer” or “Mr. Bass” is a fabrication … he will have no other choice - and would be smart to try to withdraw altogether. From: Jed Rothwell Giovanni Santostasi wrote: IH accusation are so precise both in context and timing that it should easy to show they are full of shit. Yes. For example, if Mr. Bass actually exists they can have him testify. But they do not even need to rebut the specific accusations. They can destroy I.H.'s case by proving they are running a real business. They can do this easily by showing invoices, shipping records, taxes paid, employee FICA records, customer and employee testimony, and so on.
