MY GRIVANCE & ALLEGATIONS

The complex story all reflects the combination DEONTOLOGICAL errors
all resulting from a systematic refusal to communicate fairly (since 2008) in the context of official collaborative work (started in 2006), and constituting in the end (with the PCMO50 publication in 2016) a MULTIPLE
SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT:

1) 
the construction of the "dimer" model used to rule out ZPO in PCMO hides nothing else but a failed attempt to  PLAGARISE the JMMM-ZP exchange model and the sole motivation of ignoring it is to a priori preconcieved ZPO as wrong.

2) by  faling to construct an exchange model having the right symetry, 
PERRING 2016 work IS A DELIBERATE FALSIFICATION OF THIS 2013 ILL DIFFRACTION - EXPERIMENT SINCE IT IS UNAMBIGUOUSLY PROVING THE P 21 n m SYMETRY OF PCMO50. There is no experimental report or publication, BECAUSE Toby Perring was NOT expressing ANY interest to publish it or to help me finalise it,  DESPITE THE FACT THE RESULT WAS TOLD TO HIM AND GOT  PUBLICALLY TOLD ON THE FLY ON FaceBooK :

3) The complete overllok if not the FABRICATION of  the claim TWINNING is accounted for.


I SHOULD HAVE EITHER NOT BEEN AKNOWLEDGED AT ALL,
OR
... CO-AUTHOR & COLLABORATOR OF A COMPLETELY
REVISED VERSION OF THIS PAPER ,
AS 10 YEARs  BACK:

 - I HAD ORIENTED AT THE ILL THE XTAL IN MOST SUITABLE SCATTERING PLANES THANK MY EXPERTISE IN TWINNING
- I HAVE MADE THE ONLY POSSIBLE CHECK OF
THE COMPOSITION OF THE CRYSTAL, PROVING IT IS A TRUELY HALF-*DOPED MATERIAL THANKS MY PHD EXPERTISE ON THE CHANGE OF MAGNETISM IN PCMO
- I PARTICIPATED TO THE FIRST ILL-INS EXPERIMENT IN 2006 :
- I BEEN BLANKED OUT FOREVER SINCE 2008... 
- THOUGH IT TURNS UP
THAT OVER TIME, I WAS THE ONLY ONE ABLE TO SET THE ZP EXCHANGE MODEL RIGHT...