reliability NOT

This is too juicy. On JONP, Leanne or Joanne wrote:

Joanne
June 16, 2017 at 8:32 PM

Dr Andrea Rossi:
Let me inform the readers of the JONP of what is happening in the blog paid by IH ( Lenr Forum): a guy presented himself as an attorney of the USA, expert of litigations like yours with IH. He wrote a lot of stupidities, like you will lose the case because of a lot of issues that still have to be discussed in court. Since no serious attorney would ever discuss publicly about a litigation on course of which he is not part, I asked an attorney my friend if he could check if this guy is really an attorney. My attorney, after one hour, informed me that:
1- in the USA does not exist any person with that name that has ever participated to a case in a court
2- this fake attorney has stolen the identity of a person that never appeared in any court (this is why I prefer not to name him)
3- at the address indicated on Lenr Forum of this “attorney”, there is a post office!
This having been said, since he cites particulars that only the gang of the ventriloquist of Raleigh can know, it is clear that this clownerie has been organized by IH in their home-blog.
Certainly IH must be scratching the bottom of their barrel… The comic aspect of this squalid thing is that a puppet of the ventriloquist -obviously on Lenr Forum- has commented that a NEUTRAL (!!!) attorney, at last, has explained to us the truth about the litigation.
Comments?
Ad majora,
Leanne

 Previously, this JONP user posted as “Leanne,” Leanne Tuffy,” signed as “Joanne” and now as “Leanne,” seems strangely confused as to her name. I assume “her” because the identity is female, though many of Rossi’s apparent socks on LF (which Rossi claims not to read, though he often has responded to comments there … though usually through an obvious sock.)

Andrea Rossi
June 16, 2017 at 9:22 PM

Joanne:
No comment.
By the way, I do not read LENR Forum.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Rossi has commonly referred to LF, as I recall, as “owned by IH.” It is a very strange opinion for those who are familiar with that Forum. If anything, LF is owned by a person sympathetic to the idea of Rossi Reality. The claims by Leanne or Joanne or whoever are strange. I don’t see a real name, nor any address, in the LF commentary on this alleged lawyer. Rends wrote:

It is like painting pictures, Howard Michael Appel, nickname woodworker … https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/user-post-list/2411-woodworker/

…a very experienced lawyer, describes his experiences inside the US law system and gives Rossi et.al no chance at all to win this trial. But, is this really the truth? Maybe, but the Americans have also elected Donald Trump, so we have to see what happened to Rossi. 😉

… a quite ignorant comment, because Trump was not elected in a deliberative process, but a primitive amalgamation, well-known to be vulnerable to massive stupidities by voting system experts. Trump is not the question here, but is this a Forum moderator doxxing woodworker? By the way, if woodworker revealed private data and later deleted it, I would also delete references to it here, unless the public interest in identity becomes overwhelming (which I don’t expect). Mary Yugo outed herself, by an apparently inadvertent post years ago, but that does not make it a wilful revelation of real-life identity. Mary is persistent and sometimes “her” real-life identity is relevant, but I won’t insult Mary by claiming that doxxing is harmless. It can chill discussion.

(Note added: Simon kindly pointed to where Howard gave his name.)

The link Rends provided is only to woodworker’s contributions. It does not establish the name. However, this was in the first post by woodworker that is still up (there could be more, and the profile might have had personal information, removed)

I am a noob to this site (sort of). I spent the last month or so catching up to this point and still have another 12 or so pages to fully catch up. I have held off replying/commenting on posts so far because I thought it best to wait to see if comments I might respond to had already been addressed. But I have to respond to Mr. A. Smith’s comment “Deeply untypical. And whatever happens it will be appealed by one side or the other. That’s when I expect to see rebuttal evidence, not before.”

No disrespect to Mr. Smith, but this is total nonsense. I am not a scientist nor an engineer. I am an attorney who has practiced for over 25 years, including opposing Jones Day (a/k/a Jones Day, Night & Weekends for the amount of billable hours expected of their associates and Jone, Day, Reavis, Pogue & Satan, also by their associates). I started with a “small” firm called O’Melveny & Myers and then spent time with Hughes Hubbard & Reed before going inhouse.

This is not consistent with the LF owned by IH claim. Alan Smith is a moderator, one of the most active. Nor is this friendly to Jones Day, Night, Weekends, Holidays, and the Kitchen Sink.

This is, however, lawyer humor, very recognizable. And woodworker definitely writes like a lawyer, he’s well-informed on law. The claim that a real lawyer would never say these things would be made by a person naive about real lawyers. They say all kinds of things, particularly in private or where they are not legally responsible. Who is this person? Rends has an idea, and does not say where he got the idea, his link is nothing specific. However, Howard Michael Appel is definitely a lawyer. It is possible that there is more than one by that name, most information sites were a bit vague, and the California Bar member listing was down. A California attorney information site had:

Howard Michael Appel
Admitted to Bar 9 June 1992 (25 years ago)
Status Active
Bar Number 158674

Woodworker on Fogbow signed Howard Michael Appel (Ca. State Bar No. 158674).

This establishes high probability of connection. Leanne/Joanne is likely lying, as before. However, what if LF “woodworker” is an imposter? Why would Rends name this person, since woodworker didn’t (on LF)? Or did he? [He did, I just missed it.]

As is common on LF with some users, more attention is paid to conclusions than to fact. It’s true that lawyers will be normally cautious about predicting trial outcomes. This is common with professionals in difficult fields. I asked my urologist what would happen if we didn’t treat my prostate cancer. He said, “I can’t say.” I then said, “You have experience. I am not asking for a definite prediction for my case, but, in general, in your experience, what is likely to happen?” He then told me, and I concluded, with support from published medical literature, to stick with “watchful waiting,” which proved to be an excellent decision, so far. In fact, for a time we thought the cancer had disappeared. In fact, it simply never was large, it was small enough that a second biopsy later missed it, and it shows no sign of rapid growth.

If you want the best advice, you need to know what questions to ask and how to get informed answers, in a situation where doctors are afraid that any incorrect statement can earn them a fat lawsuit.

However, a lawyer with experience can, in fact, predict outcomes with better than chance success, sometimes much better. Woodworker gives legal fact and also his opinions. Those who don’t like his conclusions ignore the facts presented, that’s all too common. His opinions, however, were factually based. That doesn’t create a rigid and certain conclusion, merely something considered likely.

Woodworker is not the Fogbow user who started up a Rossi v. Darden thread, where I have added some comments. In that thread, there is some good reporting and analysis and the usual uninformed knee-jerk reactions whenever cold fusion comes up. And I’m going to visit a real live human, now, I’ll be away from the computer till tomorrow. If all hell breaks loose, save it for tomorrow. (actually I get notification by iphone of comments here, which is now usable since I enabled a good spam filter.)

Author: Abd ulRahman Lomax

See http://coldfusioncommunity.net/biography-abd-ul-rahman-lomax/

7 thoughts on “reliability NOT”

  1. While on the subject of reliability, Jeffrey ( probably another Rossi puppet) writes;-

    “Jeffrey
    June 17, 2017 at 5:37 AM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    I read of the fake attorney invented on lenr forum: what a miserable thing.”

    If I thought it had a hope of being published on his blog I would write something like;-
    “Dr Andrea Rossi:
    I read of the fake JM Products company invented by Mr Rossi in the office of his lawyers: what a miserable thing.”

    The news is not all bad however.
    I also read;-

    “Andrea Rossi
    June 17, 2017 at 8:26 AM
    JPR:
    Well on our way toward sigma 5.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.”
    Gosh! That’s just riveting news. That’s the first time we’ve heard about this,.. today.
    I hope he can get back faster than he is taking to get there because he has a court case to attend in one week, and I think he should at least put in an appearance. It simply will not do to claim he is unavoidably detained due to being on his way back from Sigma 5.
    Maybe this link might be appropriate here.

    https://youtu.be/8r2mPdsPqrw

  2. Hi Abd
    I tried to link the Las Alamos
    Daily post news story about. Dr. Thomas Claytor, that I posted.
    No big deal to me but I thought I should let you know.

    Regards
    Sam

  3. Abd – see https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4745-rossi-vs-darden-developments-part-2/?postID=62071#post62071 for where Woodworker states his name. Of course, this may not be the truth, but unless you ask Mr. Appel (which is a good name for a lawyer) himself then it is not possible to be certain. Note that the bar number matches, though – he’s not worried about speaking as himself if that is the real Howard Appel. His posts certainly look very competent, anyway.

    1. Hi Simon

      Did you notice that Jed and Fan boy agree for once and
      welcome Woodworker.
      M.Y is still giving them hell
      though.
      Regards
      Sam

    2. If it mattered, I’d call him up. I might call him for other reasons, but not for this one, because it doesn’t matter, this was merely one more utterly stupid inanity from Planet Rossi.

  4. https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4745-rossi-vs-darden-developments-part-2/?postID=62071#post62071

    Well, as I am already in the water, let’s continue:

    People have commented on the inevitability of an appeal: Well guess what, if you lose and want to appeal, then Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62 requires you to post a bond for the amount of the judgement, plus costs. Here is a good link to an article on appellate bonds, prepared by those nasty folks at Jones Day, of course.

    Also, for those of you who want to know who I am, my name is Howard Michael Appel, California state bar no. 158674. I post on and am a member of the The Fogbow and Quatloos, as well as too many to count woodworking forums.

    http://www.jonesday.com/files/…_2008_The_Appeal_Bond.pdf
    JedRothwell, Jack Cole, Eric Walker and 2 others like this

    1. This was posted before Simon Derricut’s correction, but because “Frstfddl” had no approved posts, this was not as visible as the comments of already-approved users. Because this comment doesn’t add anything that is not covered by Simon’s link, and could be confusing, I will probably delete this, after a pause, but thank Firstfddl for the attempted correction. Frstfddl should now be able to post without delay. Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WordPress Anti Spam by WP-SpamShield