Think of the Jury

I’ve never seen anything quite like the E-Cat story. Over the last few days  here there has been intense scrutiny of every last detail that can be gleaned from the recent reports and photos, and the discussion/debate shows no sign of dying down so far. I think I understand the reason why there is such intense interest among readers — we are dealing with a technology which, if real, could have a profound impact on the world.

However, at the moment, I think it takes a certain mindset to get excited about the E-Cat and LENR. It is an unproven technology/phenomenon, and from my own observations, the average person is not that interested in technologies that may or may not be real.  I think this is part of the reason why we have seen so little interest in this field among the mainstream media — the average media consumer really doesn’t care that much. Most people tend to get interested in technologies once they are proven and are available in the marketplace for use.

It all makeors ws me wonder what the judge is making of this story, and what the eventual jurors will think about it all. We are here because we want to be, but this is just another case assigned to Judge Altonaga, probably complegely unlike anything she has seen before. And think of the jurors who are selected from everyday life to find themselves dealing with a subject that has probably never crossed their mind before, being presented with all the details that we have been following over recent years. They are going to be subjected to reams of documents dealing with complex scientific topics with witnesses looking at things from totally different perspectives. And my understanding is that the trial will last two weeks, so they will be expected to be able to come to an informed decision in a very short time.

Rossi’s team contends that he deserves to be paid because Penon’s report states that the plant exceeds the requirements  of the agreement. IH’s team contends that the Penon report cannot be trusted because it is impossible for the plant to have worked as Penon certified.  If I was a juror, I am sure the main question on my mind would be, does the E-Cat work? Can it really produce substantially more energy than it consumes? If in the jury’s mind the answer is yes, Rossi’s side would probably prevail; if the answer is no, he would probably lose.

Probably the judge is wondering the same thing, too. If I were the judge, one way I might think of trying  to resolve this dilemma would be to ask for some kind of new E-Cat demonstration or test to be conducted. Based on what we have seen, at this point, it doesn’t sound like it is possible to go back and recreate the Doral plant test, but it should be possible to have Rossi conduct a new E-Cat test with another reactor. It doesn’t have to be 1 MW — just something that can show that in principle E-Cat technology is valid.

I don’t know if this is likely, or even legally possible given court rules, but to me it would be a common sense thing to do, and I think it would be very helpful to the jurors who might find all the scientific and forensic debates quite confusing.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Seems that the “spoliation” issue is (for now) off the table:

    “Having held a hearing in this matter, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the defendant’s request for sanctions is DENIED for the reasons stated on the record.” (266, p. 1)

    • Josh G

      “For now” is the operative term. Document 268 is a notice for a hearing on May 23 in front of judge Altonga on the spoliation motion (among others).

  • Andreas Moraitis

    264, “Defendants’ motion in limine”, p. 6:

    “One megawatt (1 MW) of energy is a massive amount of energy”

    If I were the judge, I would send these attorneys back to school.

    • cashmemorz

      Er, attornies went to law school. For physics, as to the difference between energy and power they just call in a special witness or get a legal clerk to find out the definition. On this point Rossi can give his own lawyer a hint to avoid mixing up terms and therein show that the defendents’ expert witnesses don’t know what they are talking about

      • Andreas Moraitis

        “Attorneys went to law school”

        Yes, but I assume they have a high school diploma. And power vs. energy is not even high school level. If they need an expert for that, then good night.

        • psi2u2

          Right.

      • psi2u2

        Yes, but such a fundamental error looks very bad for these lawyers. Even lawyers, when writing about a technical subject, need to pass a certain threshold of plausibility and talk the talk at least at the most basic level. Otherwise they are merely harming their clients with their ignorance. This is not rocket science.

  • cashmemorz

    The extent of evidence is regarding the one agreement covering the one device by the plaintive and not others. What IH did with others, be they involved with LENR devices or marmalade is of no import to the case at hand. IH will be identified as a partner involved with Leonardo Corp. Other LENR entities are tied in to Cherokee which entities are an indirect association with Leonardo. No need for the jury to get tangential information that has little or no bearing on the case between LEonardo and IH.

    • psi2u2

      I don’t entirely agree. IH’s pattern of behavior looks like patent trolling, and that activity is certainly relevant to Rossi’s case for their alleged breach of contract. The extent to which the judge will allow testimony to that effect is of course a legal question on which I am not qualified to opine. But, as a matter of logic and reasoning, I think IH’s other activities in the LENR field should definitely be regarded as relevant — although not AS relevant as more basic questions like whether or not the 1MW plant actually achieved the COPs Rossi claims or was, as IH lawyers claim, a sham.

      • cashmemorz

        The other LENR entities that IH is gathering under their investment strategy may give a character reference about IH. And other side issues. But only to give the jury a general idea about what IH is about. If anything, should the jury get hung about who to side with, such side issues could be considered to swing the balance of justice.

  • FC

    The more I think of the jury, the more I’m reminded of Diogenes of Sinope, who used to walk around Athens with a lamp in broad daylight searching for an honest man.
    https://www.wikiart.org/en/jacob-jordaens/diogenes-searching-for-an-honest-man

    • georgehants

      And nothing has changed in two and a half thousand years, we should be so proud.

      • FC

        Lol. Exactly George.

  • Obvious

    No. I don’t know if the video file issue was ever resolved. It was one of the very few evidences provided by Leonardo et al in discovery, before the ‘final’ deadline. There was a comment from IH about the unusable video files at around the same time it was revealed the Fabiani was in Russia.

    I was sort of looking forward to the ‘stellar’ dance part that Rossi was going on about once upon a time.

  • Interesting. Perhaps some more meat on the Quark bones to chew on soon (emphasis added).

    Yes. We are preparing an updated version, more detailed and with the addiction of the description of an experiment made with standard calorimetry, whose results will be compared to the results obtained by direct measurements made using the Wien and Boltzmann equations. Also the theoretical part will be reviewed. We are studying and experimenting.

  • GiveADogABone

    Contract fulfilled – CoP greater than 6
    not fulfilled – CoP less than 6
    Q. Anything in the evidence from Murray and Smith that proves the CoP was less than 6?
    A. Nothing that I can find.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      However, even with a sufficient COP the question if the IP was completely transferred would still be critical.

      • GiveADogABone

        First, the contract gets annulled for failure to pay?
        Then its damages and return of all IP?

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I wonder if the contract could be voided in part. If so, there are many options. Otherwise (contract voided as a whole), I guess AR could keep his IP but might have to return the 10M.

          • GiveADogABone

            Rossi has already offered to pay back the 10M in exchange for the IP. IH said no.

            • Andreas Moraitis

              That offer has not yet been confirmed. Certainly, if AR has what he says this would seem to be the best solution for him. He could easily get ten times more money from a big industrial partner, not including the professional assistance in R&D, production, marketing and distribution. IH might be interested in keeping the IP even if they think that AR’s technology does not work, simply in order to avoid potential patent conflicts.

              • GiveADogABone

                Letting IH have some obsolete IP to play with is one thing, letting them have any chance of getting the QuarkX IP is a totally different matter.

  • What happened to the big quarkx announcement planned for february 2017?

    • Evidence for the QuarkX, of various weight, includes:
      – Gullstrom’s experiment and public paper co-authored with Rossi (duped? co-conspirator?)
      – Fabiani’s interview with Mats that included eye-witness observations (co-conspirator?)
      – Leaked picture of Rossi orienting a team of engineers (?) on operation of the QX, with COP > 1700! (elaborate deception with paid actors?)
      – New exhaust pipes on the JMP side, post 1 MW test (why if nothing’s getting really hot?)
      – The ‘glow’ picture of the QX that Rossi released (ok, doesn’t show much but does hint that Sapphire plays a role)
      – Rossi’s assertions (history shows we can only note these, as we cannot determine which are sharing and which are feints… but they have been quite detailed in terms of heat/light/electricity obervations, pursuit of 5 sigma, etc.)

      A smelly stew of deception and conspiracy? Is that what you really think or does your gut tell you that maybe, just maybe, something real is going on here?

      I would like to welcome Gullstrom to the conspiracy super-team. I hope you are getting paid very well to throw your fledgling career into the toilet. /s

    • Jas

      Rossi has mentioned on his JONP that the demonstration will not take place until after the court case has finished.

    • Gerard McEk

      Why do you ask for something you must know, barty?

      A few month ago AR said (JoNP) that he would delay it, due to the work for ongoing court case he felt that he had not enough time to properly prepare an open test like this. Now I believe it might also that his physical health may have played a role.

  • Obvious

    The video was provided, early on, but for some reason it was not in a viewable format (or something like that).

  • What do you think about the fact that Rossi told us at JoNP that he has
    – developed the quark
    – a new industrial customer
    – a new factory in sweden

    and in the court under oath he says that he has
    no new partner
    no new factory
    no new customer

    • doug marker

      In the court he can do jail time for telling lies. In public he can say what he thinks he can get away with. As said many times before Andrea is a hard case. He will give IH a tough time 🙂

      Doug

      • Swede

        The QuarkX is real, sorry to say that you have to take my word for it. I have seen it live and as AR would say it is a master piece. It is something totaly different from the E-cat, both in scale and function.

        • Ciaranjay

          Well that’s me convinced then.

          • psi2u2

            You read it here first!

        • doug marker

          Swede – Thanks, I appreciate your comment.

          All we need now is for AR to bring something to a usable conclusion.

          His lack of final execution for any of his inventions is creating too many problems. As much for himself as for anyone else.

          Cheers Doug

          • Omega Z

            I prefer Rossi drag it out rather then to launch prematurely. A false start could lead to another 20 year delay. There are those who will make sure of that…

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I guess it is less relevant what he said on JoNP over the last years. We have seen that he sometimes exaggerates, but I would tend to interpret this as a typical Mediterranean habit. By “factory” he most likely means his warehouse in Doral, thus a “new factory” might be the same warehouse, equipped with new machinery. He has also been talking about a planned factory in Sweden, which is, however, obviously not yet set up.

      It is correct that he says in one of the depositions that there was no new partner “in the development of E-Cat units” (see Can’s compilation, p. 59). On the other hand he mentions “a collaboration with Hydrofusion” (ibid., p. 58) in Sweden. I do not think that this implies necessarily a contradiction, since this partnership is everything else but “new”. Also, Hydrofusion might not be directly involved in the development of the units.

    • BillH

      It’s best not to commit perjury.

      • So I guess there really was a heat exchanger then.