It takes a lawyer, or a former lawyer, to recognize the following comment by Jones (a former lawyer): 2) "There are no Rossi reactors in Greece." True. In fact the reactors submitted to the Greek government are made by DGT, called Hyperions and are not Rossi's E-Cats, and come from a design of Praxen-DGT, a separate company.
Rossi: "No E-Cats have ever been testing in Greece"... DGT: Claims of testing Hyperions and submitting units to govt for testing... How can both of these statements be true? How can Rossi be both right and wrong? If Rossi is clever enough, then that statement could be true as literally and strictly interpreted... as Jones points out. It would be in Rossi's interest to make it look like DGT might have stretched the truth a bit (by claiming to have tested devices in Greece). Rossi knows where every single E-Cat reactor is, and he can say with certainty that one was never given to Greece/DGT... that could very well be a true statement. However, the DGT claim of testing Hyperions in Greece could also be true if DGT has succeeded in producing reactors which also work, without having reverse-engineered one given to them by Rossi... DGT is not Rossi, and Hyperions are not E-Cats. You have to read these things very carefully! It is common knowledge in the legal realm (attorneys, judges and courtrooms) that 'LEGAL' definitions are very different from the 'common' or 'slang' definition... and it is almost always the LEGAL definition that applies in those venues. With all the interaction and courtroom time that Rossi has seen due to prior 'legal complications', he is probably very aware of the subtleties of legal jargon. -Mark
