I think it is up to the investors to make a complaint, at least one of the investors I believe is nursing a €3,000,000 loss. Maybe he is hanging on in hopes they can sell his junk shares to other duped investors. Or else he is too embarassed to be associated with the scientific fraud. Regardless, it is the investors who are the only people that can do anything right now. Everything changes though once they accept the SKDB fees. They have said enough in public about OU to make any disclaimers in contracts worthless. The next few months will be interesting.

I think it'd be very hard to prove that Steorn are malicious in intent. Sean's remarkably cagey in everything he says. You only have to read transcripts of the videos to see how many weasel-words are interjected every time he opens his mouth.

I think it'd be hard to convince a non-technical jury that Steorn were anything other than positive and entrepreneurial, but incompetent and self-deluded.

You only have to read the technical discussions on here and the other forum to see how quickly even reasonably-educated believers can be placated with a few buzz-words and faulty logic when delivered by the right personality. When faced with the harsh reality of undeniable logic and science, the safe haven of gentle pseudoscientific nonsense is an irresistable siren call. Shields up ! Setting critical thinking to zero, captain !

So, imagine a bunch of reasonably amicable guys, holding their hands up in court and saying "We're sorry, but we truly thought we had something there. We believed the SKDB members could help us bring a real product to market,". What jury member is going to ferret their way through screeds of technical-sounding jargon, weighing up the internal inconsistencies, in order to work out for themselves that the whole thing is just the same-old same-old BS perpetual motion scam ?

So, I agree it's a con. But I can't see any way to possibly deal with it through the justice system.

Posted By: UtD_GrantI think it'd be very hard to prove that Steorn are malicious in intent. Sean's remarkably cagey in everything he says.

That could cut either way.

You only have to read transcripts of the videos to see how many weasel-words are interjectedevery time he opens his mouth.

I think it'd be hard to convince a non-technical jury that Steorn were anything other than positive and entrepreneurial, but incompetent and self-deluded.

I think the greater issue is identifying the specific crime. Did they really take money from investors based on promises of perpetual motion? If they did, I think you have your crime. I think the bull shit claims like: "Always proven to work" "patents filed" and the many other Seansaidisms would run over any of his idiotic equivocations and disclaimers.

You only have to read the technical discussions on here and the other forum to see how quickly even reasonably-educated believers can be placated with a few buzz-words and faulty logic when delivered by the right personality. When faced with the harsh reality of undeniable logic and science, the safe haven of gentle pseudoscientific nonsense is an irresistable siren call. Shields up ! Setting critical thinking to zero, captain !

So, imagine a bunch of reasonably amicable guys, holding their hands up in court and saying "We're sorry, but we truly thought we had something there. We believed the SKDB members could help us bring a real product to market,". What jury member is going to ferret their way through screeds of technical-sounding jargon, weighing up the internal inconsistencies, in order to work out for themselves that the whole thing is just the same-old same-old BS perpetual motion scam ?

It's up to the prosecutor to make things understandable to the jury. Sean's sunk himself with lots of quotes about how their claims require overturning fundamental science, and how Steorn didn't believe it, and no one should believe them. To make a case that Steorn's just a collection addle minded drunks who meant no harm, Steorn would have to hold up evidence of how they vetted their claims. I don't see how they can make any case for that. YMMV.

So, I agree it's a con. But I can't see any way to possibly deal with it through the justice system.

Most scammers are clever enough to stay out of jail for a long time. They simply don't sell a product or a technology but ask for investments. And an investment always involves the risk of total loss. So in case of a fail in venture, the investors can't really blame the company because they have signed a contract with a disclaimer that says, no success guaranteed.
Seems to be some kind of natural selection for dumb investors.

Posted By: YAFFPI vote for making a group formal complaint to the Garda with a hope of getting them shut down asap before anyone else gives them money.

Look here, it took me a long time to stop feeling sorry for the suckers!, don't spoil the fun now!