Yikes! Defamation would be: "Rossi is a scammer" A personal opinion and perfectly legal: "Rossi may be a scammer (also he may not be one). Freedom of speech on that one, I think."
Really -- I had this issue come up before and I checked with an attorney who specializes in it. There's no defamation in suggestion a possibility. And the first sentence is only defamation if Rossi is not a scammer and can prove it in court. I'm not sure he could! He'd have to show to the court's satisfaction that the E-cat was real and worked as advertised! Would he do that? He sure hasn't so far. Does Rossi have investors? Does Rossi have customers? Did Rossi use his own money? Did Rossi sell his house? Well I suppose we could check on the sale but we still wouldn't know the motive if he did sell a house. But on the other issues, the only thing you're going on is WHAT ROSSI SAID! Why do you do that? How in the world would you know if Rossi had secret investors and how can you know he doesn't? Yet you believe him when he says he has a secret client. Sorry but this is too funny for words.
