Elon Musk did not defame British cave explorer, jury finds
Source: The Guardian
Elon Musk did not defame British cave explorer Vernon Unsworth by calling him a pedo guy on Twitter, a Los Angeles jury found Friday.
[snip]
Mark Stephens, Unsworths solicitor in the UK, said: It is a pity that a bullying billionaire has been able to cast such a long shadow, and I just hope that nobody else has to go
toe to toe with Mr Musk.
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/dec/06/elon-musk-vernon-unsworth-trial-verdict
Boooo... No way was this the right decision. They pulled some slippery lawyering to spoof the jury, IMO.
SunSeeker
(51,522 posts)I guess Elon Musk qualifies.
TeamPooka
(24,209 posts)oldsoftie
(12,492 posts)tblue37
(65,227 posts)Sapient Donkey
(1,568 posts)I know my opinion of him dropped significantly. Mostly the digging deeper after the initial comment. Such as hiring a private investigator to look into the guy. Like wtf? Why? All because he let himself slip up and say some awful petty things about some guy who was trying to save some kids, and he had to vindicate himself somehow? That's just weird.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,165 posts)A monetary "fine" for his faux pas, when sued after, would be not pleasant, but I'm sure he would absorb it no problem and move on.
But he has already damaged his brand so to speak. He came off as childish. Someone that wanted to play with his new toy, his little sub, and envisioned himself being lauded as a world wide hero. And promote his brand. Suddenly this nobody butts in front of him to steal the spotlight. And he had a tantrum. He did not come out well. Nor should he have.
Sapient Donkey
(1,568 posts)Last edited Sat Dec 7, 2019, 12:22 PM - Edit history (1)
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pedo%20guy**Edit** I should make it clear that I don't actually think this proves Elon didn't defame the diver. That entry is a joke entry made by someone pretending to be Elon Musk trying to give himself cover with a ridiculous urban dictionary entry. I thought it was amusing when I saw it awhile ago. Mostly because I can't say for sure that it isn't actually Elon Musk being a troll. It's probably not, but it's not like it would be shocking if it turned out to be given the fact he is a bit of a man-child despite his successes. My actual views of Elon and this are in a post somewhere above this one.
marble falls
(57,013 posts)Sapient Donkey
(1,568 posts)Might not have to deal with him much longer.
marble falls
(57,013 posts)Sadly I got to admit landing Space-X standing up was pretty freaking cool. Don't tell anyone I said that.
truthisfreedom
(23,140 posts)marble falls
(57,013 posts)It would have been interesting to understand more about the reasoning of British courts. Either way, Elon is no compelling character for me.
Sapient Donkey
(1,568 posts)As in, someone made that jokingly pretending to be Elon Musk trying to give himself cover by making a ridiculous entry on ubran dictionary.
BannonsLiver
(16,313 posts)Sapient Donkey
(1,568 posts)Last edited Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:58 PM - Edit history (1)
At least I don't think I do. There may be some free speech aspects I am not considering, but my initial thoughts are that the ruling doesn't seem right. Either way, my opinion of Musk dropped a lot due this incident. Him calling the guy a child rapist and also hiring PI to look into the guy is not only wrong, but it's just really weird. The urban dictionary definition is supposed to be a joke of sorts.
oldsoftie
(12,492 posts)LisaM
(27,794 posts)What is it about our current climate that gives billionaires carte blanche to behave in this fashion?
I hope they can afford to appeal.
OneCrazyDiamond
(2,031 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,271 posts)He signed off with a message about the lingering threat of the lawsuit. "As for this alleged threat of a lawsuit, which magically appeared when I raised the issue (nothing was sent or raised beforehand), I f***ing hope he sues me."
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/elon-musk-thai-cave-rescue-pedo-guy-attack-vern-unsworth-latest-email-a8523346.html
That also shows the claim that it was just a random insult is bullshit (as well as the "bet you he is" follow-up remark to the tweet).
On BBC radio, Unsworth's lawyer said 2 jurors claimed their reason for letting Musk off was that Unsworth wasn't specifically named in the tweet, so most people wouldn't have known it was about him. Which is also bullshit.
Musk claimed the British just looked on it as an insult. Which is also bullshit - from the Guardian's reporting at the time:
Elon Musk came under fire on Sunday after launching an extraordinary attack on a British diver who helped rescue the boys trapped in a flooded cave in Thailand, baselessly calling him a pedo on Twitter and then doubling down.
...
The accusation, presented without evidence or context, was directed at Vern Unsworth, a British cave explorer who recently said Musks attempt to help the rescue effort was a PR stunt. No evidence has emerged to substantiate Musks claim of pedophilia.
...
On Sunday, when a Twitter user pointed out that Musk was calling the guy who found the children a pedo, the billionaire responded: Bet ya a signed dollar its true.
Intense criticism followed. Some Twitter users pointed out how dangerous and irresponsible it was to make such a serious allegation and to broadcast a potentially libelous insult to his 22 million followers.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/15/elon-musk-british-diver-thai-cave-rescue-pedo-twitter
Clearly, the British media took the accusation very seriously, and were at pains to point out it was baseless.
sl8
(13,679 posts)Ryan Mac is a senior tech reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in San Francisco.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RMac18/status/1203105107778293761
@RMac18
A few mins ago I spoke with a juror on the Musk defamation case who talked about the jury's rationale. I'll try to explain what he said in a thread.
@RMac18
The juror was Carl Shusterman, an LA-based attorney who during jury selection was notable for saying he owned 2 Teslas and had both "negative & positive thoughts" about Musk. He assured court that he would remain unbiased in his decision making and nothing suggested otherwise.
@RMac18
Shusterman told me that the judge gave them clear instructions on how to determine defamation and that it had to clear five points. The main sticking point was that the jury could not determine "acquaintance."
@RMac18
That means: Can a reasonable person who read Musk's tweets know for sure it was about Unsworth? The jury decided that the person couldn't and based their decision mainly on that. They were unanimous on this and moved quickly once establishing (less than an hour).
@RMac18
Musk's defense team led made it a clear argument that Musk's "pedo guy" tweet never mentioned Unsworth by name. That ended up being the key.
@RMac18
None of these jurors followed Musk on Twitter and it's not even clear if they have Twitter accounts.
The decision also underscores how there's a world online where stuff happens that real world people have no idea about.
@RMac18
And there it is. The perfect description.
[...]
muriel_volestrangler
(101,271 posts)eg a blue-ticked Atlantic writer replying to Musk on the day:
Link to tweet
?lang=en
and Musk subsequently hired a private eye to investigate Unsworth and called him a "child rapist", a 'reasonable person' wouldn't have known it was about him?
What bullshit.
And, as Musk's tweets on the day show, he'd identified Unsworth as a "British expat guy who lives in Thailand" and called that "sus", even before the 'pedo guy' comment. "Pedo guy" was not just an insult - it was part of the character assassination. See https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/remysmidt/elon-musk-attacks-diver-who-helped-rescue-thai-boys , which has screen shots of the tweets.