VIDEO: British cave explorer Vern Unsworth considers legal action against Elon Musk

[AdamBernau]

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

Rocket scientists work on capsules to support human life in conditions where there is no air to breathe. Rocket scientists are top level engineers. They test their designs underwater all the time.  There's a lot of similarities between a sub and a spaceship.

 

A rocket scientist works on rockets, not life support systems such as space ships. That's actually two very different disciplines.  

[canuckamuck]

3 minutes ago, AdamBernau said:

A rocket scientist works on rockets, not life support systems such as space ships. That's actually two very different disciplines.  

Kind of splitting hairs now eh? Maybe Elon had a capsule guy involved. The bigger point is they were highly skilled engineers.

[ttrd]

On ‎7‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 10:23 AM, CelticBhoy said:

How is this "piece" going to fit into the movie then?  ?

Rupert Everett may be the answer...

 

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/entertainment/gay-actors-in-hollywood-treated-like-second-class-citizens-rupert-everett-848050.html

[chainarong]

On ‎7‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 4:44 PM, Shroud said:

Musk could easily win this case since Vern started the rant. Everyone tried to offer help in this severe situation so to blame Elon for his mini-sub and call it a PR-stunt isn't something that has valid points. In the beginning, it was the thai authorities that pleaded for international help and they got it, including Vern Unsworth. 

I'm not siding with Elon, but Vern went too far with his remarks on CNN.

I think Vern was just saying what the hell is this guy doing here getting in the way and wasting precious time, something they didn't have.

[Horace]

3 hours ago, JLCrab said:

There is no such thing as US defamation laws. It is a state-by-state issue. And California might not be such a good place to bring a case that might require proof of malice.

You are right about it being state by state (too quick).  But the proof of malice requirement varying between public and private persons stems from a US Supreme Court decision (the Sullivan case).  I am not sure why California would be a worse state than any other on the proof of malice issue, but be curious about any insight on this issue.

[flyingfox1]

Musk clearly thought he was in a position to help and was actively seeking a solution, he believed that his drilling company may of been a option however after specialist advice he hopted for a mini type of sub, I believe this was a genuine effort on his part as he doesnt need the fame or glory as he’s achieved this already with space-x with massive world coverage... but to be belittled by others he was a fame seeker and his sub was in other words unwanted and useless, he has wrongly let anger loose from a impulse on those who are actually in the front line mostly British diver Vern for his very negative words... the stress of “men in action” with adrenaline running through the veins makes people say things in the spare of the moment, however he was wrong to criticise someone for trying to help... having said that the nasty uncalled for reaction from musk was way below the belt and couldn’t get much lower... mr musk should keep reaching for the stars and create dreams and not roll around in the dirt - think they really should both apologise in this war of words - but because Vern was personally labelled the worst kind of character assassination then I see it only fitting that musk should do the right thing and compensate Vern accordingly.....


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, flyingfox1 said:

Musk clearly thought he was in a position to help and was actively seeking a solution, he believed that his drilling company may of been a option however after specialist advice he hopted for a mini type of sub, I believe this was a genuine effort on his part as he doesnt need the fame or glory as he’s achieved this already with space-x with massive world coverage... but to be belittled by others he was a fame seeker and his sub was in other words unwanted and useless, he has wrongly let anger loose from a impulse on those who are actually in the front line mostly British diver Vern for his very negative words... the stress of “men in action” with adrenaline running through the veins makes people say things in the spare of the moment, however he was wrong to criticise someone for trying to help... having said that the nasty uncalled for reaction from musk was way below the belt and couldn’t get much lower... mr musk should keep reaching for the stars and create dreams and not roll around in the dirt - think they really should both apologise in this war of words - but because Vern was personally labelled the worst kind of character assassination then I see it only fitting that musk should do the right thing and compensate Vern accordingly.....

Much better if they both meet up , both apologise, shake hands and consider the matter over

[JLCrab]

12 minutes ago, Horace said:

You are right about it being state by state (too quick).  But the proof of malice requirement varying between public and private persons stems from a US Supreme Court decision (the Sullivan case).  I am not sure why California would be a worse state than any other on the proof of malice issue, but be curious about any insight on this issue.

All I have said is that, if Mr. Unsworth found lawyers to bring a libel case against Mr. Musk in California, it would not be the slam-dunk case you seem to suggest and that, once filed Musk's lawyers would then rush to settle. The rest who knows? He may tell the lawyers for Unsworth: Go ahead ... Make my day.

 

And although you note that 95% of cases are settled before trial, how many of those defendants were worth 20 billion dollars? And there was another US Supreme Court case following Sullivan which established the principle of "Limited-purpose public figure"

Edited July 17, 2018 by JLCrab

[ttrd]

15 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Much better if they both meet up , both apologise, shake hands and consider the matter over

Sure - if Vern want to continue to spend happy days in LOS and not using the healthy time he has left on burning his savings on lawyers in the US were Money talks and through that fact the case can be delayed over and over again until his funds are all gone and/or he pass away they better grow up and shake hands.

 

JustSaying…

 

 

Edited July 17, 2018 by ttrd

[Horace]

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

However the real underlying case law here is a US Supreme Court post-Sullivan ruling that established a "limited-purpose public figure" in libel cases as --

 

"... an individual voluntarily injects himself or is drawn into a particular public controversy, and thereby becomes a public figure for a limited range of issues. In either case, such persons assume special prominence in the resolution of public questions."

Do you think Musk could successfully raise this to justify calling Vern a pedophile?   I don't claim any expertise on this issue, but that would be surprising to me. 

 

And since the public figure issue arises out of a US Supreme Court decision, I would expect that all states make this distinction, but again I am no expert.  But I did check and Mosk lives in California so I would think jurisdictional and venue issues would be easy in California.

 

V could sue outside of the US to avoid First Amendment protections, but any judgment he obtained would be hard or impossible to enforce in the US.  Musk is a rich man and it would not surprising to learn he has assets in a jurisdiction friendlier to defamation claims.

 

Ultimately, however, I would think Must would want to settle this case.  If he claims he's not liable because V is a public figure, he's basically saying: "yeah, so what: I falsely called this guy a pedo, but because he's a public figure I am not liable for making such a reprehensible claim".  And then what if a court decides V is not a public figure (I don't think its clear cut).  Musk is at considerable risk and smart approach would be to quickly settle out of court.  V won't have problems finding good lawyers willing to take this on a contingency fee basis.

[JLCrab]

If Unsworth were considered "limited-purpose public figure" under CA law, which I think would likely be the case following his worldwide CNN media exposure , then Unswoth would have to prove malice. The Twitter posts by Musk occurred 1-2 days after Unsworth spoke on CNN so I don't think malice could be easily proven.

 

Other than that let's see what Unsworth does next as he has said he wants to get legal advice rafter returning to UK.

[Horace]

7 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

All I have said is that, if Mr. Unsworth found lawyers to bring a libel case against Mr. Musk in California, it would not be the slam-dunk case you seem to suggest and that, once filed Musk's lawyers would then rush to settle. The rest who knows? He may tell the lawyers for Unsworth: Go ahead ... Make my day.

 

And although you note that 95% of cases are settled before trial, how many of those defendants were worth 20 billion dollars? And there was another US Supreme Court case following Sullivan which established the principle of "Limited-purpose public figure"

Don't disagree with most of what you are saying.  But I do think that a lawyer offering good advice would tell Mosk to settle.  There are financial damages and damages to Mosk's reputation.  The stakes for Mosk are high and I think Mr. Unsworth could find a good lawyer willing to handle this on a contingency fee basis.  So no cost to Unsworth. 

 

Putting aside legal issues, as a moral issue, I think Mosk's conduct here was beyong reprehensible.  Quite frankly, that is the real reason I think Mr. Unsworth should pursue this.  What Mosk did was wrong, and he should not get away with it.  I also don't like the insinuation about Thailand.

[JLCrab]

I have said this before -- a good contingency lawyer has to be willing and able to absorb expenses prior to any damage awards and those could be significant. I don't think Musk even knew Unsworth existed before he saw Unswsorth on CNN so hard to show malice.

 

So you may be right but I do not think it a sure thing that Musk would be so contrite and just settle. This may soon not be something to speculate as Unsworth has publicly said he is seeking possible legal remedies. he told the Guardian: This is not over.

Edited July 17, 2018 by JLCrab

[ttrd]

4 minutes ago, Horace said:

Don't disagree with most of what you are saying.  But I do think that a lawyer offering good advice would tell Mosk to settle.  There are financial damages and damages to Mosk's reputation.  The stakes for Mosk are high and I think Mr. Unsworth could find a good lawyer willing to handle this on a contingency fee basis.  So no cost to Unsworth. 

 

Putting aside legal issues, as a moral issue, I think Mosk's conduct here was beyong reprehensible.  Quite frankly, that is the real reason I think Mr. Unsworth should pursue this.  What Mosk did was wrong, and he should not get away with it.  I also don't like the insinuation about Thailand.

RE -  I also don't like the insinuation about Thailand.

 

Neither do I, but this has nothing to do with the case and this insinuation based on sad and past realities was born long before Elon was born….

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_prostitution_in_Thailand

[billd766]

4 hours ago, Yeahbutwhytho said:

 

Well if you're over 50 and still living in thailand, it'll make you wonder..

 

Well I am 74 and I have been living here full time since 2001 and for 8 years before that I was working both in Thailand and offshore.

 

Do I wonder if I am also a pedo?

 

Hang on, I will ask my wife of 18 years plus 7 years before that we were friends.

 

My wife just laughed, so I asked my 14 year old son and my neighbours 13 year old daughter. When I explained what it meant they also laughed.

 

How about you? Are you over 50 and living in Thailand?

 

4 hours ago, Yeahbutwhytho said:

 

Ok sorry, if you're over 50 and living in pattaya it'll make you wonder

 

PS I don't live anywhere near Pattaya either.

 

Would you like to change your mind once again?

[Spidey]

16 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

he told the Guardian: This is not over.

This doesn't nessesarily mean legal action. Maybe he will be true to his word, visit Musk and stick his sub where the sun don't shine. it's more the British way, rather than litigation.

[canopy]

I just wonder what caused vern to crack. What would compel a person to step up to a mic on CNN and rip Elon a new one in front of the whole world at a time of rejoice? If it were true the things he said, that would be one thing but instead it was very strong words of slander. Then he was quick to get behind the CNN mic a second time to dish out a little more insults. Now should have been a time of relief, contemplation and maybe just a little satisfaction for vern, but instead he chose to do this. I am concerned vern is suffering from ptsd. I hope he gets the help he needs.

 

[JLCrab]

8 minutes ago, Spidey said:

This doesn't nessesarily mean legal action. Maybe he will be true to his word, visit Musk and stick his sub where the sun don't shine. it's more the British way, rather than litigation.

'Asked (by the Guardian)  if he would consider taking legal action against Musk, he told reporters: “Yes, it’s not finished.”'

 

Some lawyers will caution their prospective clients: Do not threaten legal action.

 

And just to note that Musk is a big employer in California with Tesla Motors employing over 10,000 at the former GM plant in Fremont and 6000 total employees at SpaceX with its HQ in Hawthorne let alone all the suppliers (and taco vendors) to each.

Edited July 17, 2018 by JLCrab

[billd766]

3 hours ago, robertthesculptor said:

Just no excuse for Musk to be so arrogant. He truly needs to publicly apologize. Pay the guy. Musk can afford it, and move on quickly. This could distroy him needlessly. 

Very stupid from a very smart guy

 

I just did a search on the BBC website for Tesla.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=tesla

 

Some very interesting results came up.

 

 

[digger70]

On 7/16/2018 at 4:05 PM, Brunolem said:

If you read carefully Musk's tweet, he is in fact accusing ALL the White men living in Thailand to be pedophiles.

 

Maybe a case for a mass tort lawyer here...

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-15/twitter-meltdown-elon-musk-calls-thai-cave-diver-pedophile

 

 

 

Well now,,,, You know the saying,,,,, You got to be one to Know one ? Just Sling it back to him ( Musk)

[ttrd]

20 minutes ago, canopy said:

I just wonder what caused vern to crack. What would compel a person to step up to a mic on CNN and rip Elon a new one in front of the whole world at a time of rejoice? If it were true the things he said, that would be one thing but instead it was very strong words of slander. Then he was quick to get behind the CNN mic a second time to dish out a little more insults. Now should have been a time of relief, contemplation and maybe just a little satisfaction for vern, but instead he chose to do this. I am concerned vern is suffering from ptsd. I hope he gets the help he needs.

 

Sorry to say, but those Seconds were not in his favour...My Guess is that this issue was over before it began and it seems to that Vern may be the last to understand it...

 

You cant throw the first punch and not expect a punch in return - when this happen its not the difference in force of the punches that matters, its the actual punch itself…

 

Without the comment "can stick his submarine were it hurts", the pedo comment wouldnt exist in this setting... 

Edited July 17, 2018 by ttrd

[chama]

On 7/16/2018 at 4:14 AM, darksidedog said:

Very sad that this story that was so full of joy has degenerated like this. Musk should apologise immediately and hope Mr. Unsworth will let the matter lie. I wonder if he has any idea how nasty the Thai defamation laws are?

Agreed, the maturity of Mr Musk is questionable and Mr Unsworth may have been able to let his thoughts regarding the sub pass without comment. Many of us instantly recognized the sub effort by Mr Musk as a PR stunt but if enough of these stunts are tried perhaps a workable option would present itself. Now it is time for an apology and to let the entire matter slip from the publics consciousness. 

[JLCrab]

If, once Mr. Unsworth returns to UK and retains attorneys there, and Mr. Musk's attorneys might reach out and work out an arrangement without any legal action, that is one thing. But if Mr. Unsworth should take legal action particularly in California and then expect Musk to want to settle, I think he may be in for a big surprise.

Edited July 17, 2018 by JLCrab

[Bang Bang]

I am guessing what happened was along these lines:

Unsworth had been the one first to suggest summoning Volanthen and Stanton. Then followed other cave divers. Obviously, Unsworth was protective of them. And the divers did meet with fairly quick success: they found the boys.

 

Then, blows in Musk with, I would say, 100% good intentions who, based on emails exchanged with Stanton, thought the divers could use his kid-sub to get the team out. But by the time he arrived rescuers were coalescing on the point of view that diving the kids out was the least dangerous of a bunch of lousy options.

 

Musk still thought his sub should be given a looksee, which Unsworth thought would disrupt the diving schedule.  The situation was obviously incredibly stressful for all concerned with the clock ticking down rapidly on the rescue window so a few heated words were exchanged.

 

At the end of it Unsworth said Musk could put his sub up where it hurts and Musk called Unsworth a pedo. However, in the meantime the divers got the kids out safe and sound so, personally, I couldn't give a rat's ass anymore to either of those two grown-up children.

 

But being of a kindly nature I have a suggestion for Musk and Unsworth. When you feel the rage boiling up, look inside yourself to quell the negativity. Key is to slip asap into a meditative state. In fact, I know of a chap, a part-time soccer coach, whose help you might ask. He is known the world over for his ability to calm himself as well as others in the most fiercely hostile circumstances. PM me for name/contact details.

Edited July 17, 2018 by Bang Bang

[MrMo]

You get a funding page going Mr Unsworth and I'm confident the money will roll in to put that adjective, adjective, adjective ******** (wanted to save the editor a task) where he belongs.   Many here seem to think that would be a mile or three beyond 'Pattaya Beach" as of right now.

[AdamBernau]

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

Kind of splitting hairs now eh? Maybe Elon had a capsule guy involved. The bigger point is they were highly skilled engineers. 

As far as I know the space cadets outfit has never sent anybody into space. So, unless I am mistaken, the whole mission to Mars and space tourism is far beyond pie in the sky stuff. Pie in the sky would be easy and might have even been done. There is also quite a difference between spacecrafts and submarines / pressure vessels for human occupancy and assuming you can just apply expertise in one field to the other, especially in a critical mission like this may end you in trouble. Luckily there were some level headed people who stopped that from happening.

 

From my point of view his rescue capsule was poorly thought out and offered no significant benefits compared to other, much easier and safer options. For starters, I did not see any breathing apparatus for the inside occupant, which means in case of a leak the capsule floods and there is no way to keep the occupant from drowning for an extended period of time. Only thing you can try to do is flush, but those 80, even a 100 cuft scuba tanks would be empty in no time.

 

The other drawback that comes with such a huge dead air space, is managing CO2 and O2 inside the capsule. If there is an oronasal mask with overboard dump, you do not need as high as a ventilation rate. A person at rest usually breathes around 8 - 9 l/min, but let's be conservative say 20 l/min, because they are agitated. Using the standard 80 cuft scuba tank that would give you about 70 minutes if the depth was 5 meters and the tank actually did have 200 Bar to start with. The standard ventilation rate for a single occupant breathing ambient gas would be 85 l/min and you could probably get away with half that if they are at rest breathing calmly. 16 minutes if you stick to the book or 32 minutes if you feel confident that they will not breathe too hard inside. Still, it's at least 2x to 8x the gas consumption.

 

And this is not even mentioning that the thing was not able to go through the spaces it had to go through, which Musk pretty much admitted indirectly. He said he would build a new one that could reach cave 5, where he could have walked to on that day. Vern said it would not have made 50 meters the dive from where the boys where located, not from where Musk was walked to.

 

I appreciate that he was trying to help, but he really has been acting like a complete douche, since he slammed the operation commander for not being a matter expert, when he most likely just voiced the concerns expert advisors gave him.

[Slip]

1 hour ago, canopy said:

I just wonder what caused vern to crack. What would compel a person to step up to a mic on CNN and rip Elon a new one in front of the whole world at a time of rejoice? If it were true the things he said, that would be one thing but instead it was very strong words of slander. Then he was quick to get behind the CNN mic a second time to dish out a little more insults. Now should have been a time of relief, contemplation and maybe just a little satisfaction for vern, but instead he chose to do this. I am concerned vern is suffering from ptsd. I hope he gets the help he needs.

 

Your support of Musk in this situation has been noted by most I am sure.  Can you explain exactly what Unsworth said that you think is slanderous?

[canuckamuck]

36 minutes ago, AdamBernau said:

As far as I know the space cadets outfit has never sent anybody into space. So, unless I am mistaken, the whole mission to Mars and space tourism is far beyond pie in the sky stuff. Pie in the sky would be easy and might have even been done. There is also quite a difference between spacecrafts and submarines / pressure vessels for human occupancy and assuming you can just apply expertise in one field to the other, especially in a critical mission like this may end you in trouble. Luckily there were some level headed people who stopped that from happening.

 

From my point of view his rescue capsule was poorly thought out and offered no significant benefits compared to other, much easier and safer options. For starters, I did not see any breathing apparatus for the inside occupant, which means in case of a leak the capsule floods and there is no way to keep the occupant from drowning for an extended period of time. Only thing you can try to do is flush, but those 80, even a 100 cuft scuba tanks would be empty in no time.

 

The other drawback that comes with such a huge dead air space, is managing CO2 and O2 inside the capsule. If there is an oronasal mask with overboard dump, you do not need as high as a ventilation rate. A person at rest usually breathes around 8 - 9 l/min, but let's be conservative say 20 l/min, because they are agitated. Using the standard 80 cuft scuba tank that would give you about 70 minutes if the depth was 5 meters and the tank actually did have 200 Bar to start with. The standard ventilation rate for a single occupant breathing ambient gas would be 85 l/min and you could probably get away with half that if they are at rest breathing calmly. 16 minutes if you stick to the book or 32 minutes if you feel confident that they will not breathe too hard inside. Still, it's at least 2x to 8x the gas consumption.

 

And this is not even mentioning that the thing was not able to go through the spaces it had to go through, which Musk pretty much admitted indirectly. He said he would build a new one that could reach cave 5, where he could have walked to on that day. Vern said it would not have made 50 meters the dive from where the boys where located, not from where Musk was walked to.

 

I appreciate that he was trying to help, but he really has been acting like a complete douche, since he slammed the operation commander for not being a matter expert, when he most likely just voiced the concerns expert advisors gave him.

I guess they should have asked you how to build one. You clearly are superior to Elon's crew. Just a few glances and you seen all the mistakes they made.

[AdamBernau]

5 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

I guess they should have asked you how to build one. You clearly are superior to Elon's crew. Just a few glances and you seen all the mistakes they made.

I'm sorry for writing a too wordy and technical answer!

 

A big rigid rescue pod is not required and too big anyway. All you need is keep a person's airway dry and supply a suitable breathing gas. My suggestion would have been a commercial diving helmet e.g. Kirby Morgan and then a sort of big dry bag with handles or just neoprene suits, if a bag would make it harder. They opted for positive pressure full face masks, which are a step down from a diving helmet and luckily it worked. 

 

I hope that's easier to understand.

 

Did you see Musk's tweet where he said he only met Thai Navy / Army personal visiting the cave, despite being in touch with Stanton earlier on? I guess the rescuers were too busy preparing for a feasible rescue than trying to tell him how his contraption had no chance of even reaching the boys and what else his guys may need to change. Built and extensively tested for a hairy mission under harshest condition in a matter of two days. That's more like a prototype for the prototype of a prototype...

[Brunolem]

27 minutes ago, AdamBernau said:

Built and extensively tested for a hairy mission under harshest condition in a matter of two days. That's more like a prototype for the prototype of a prototype...

Exactly!!!

Forget the technicalities and everything else...the main issue here is testing!

You don't jump from the drawing board to the prototype to public use with humans on board just like that!

Even with their rudimentary procedure, which didn't involve the use of a mechanical device, the divers made many tests before moving on with the children.

A mini submarine like this would have to be tested by independent entities, then to be certified, before being authorized for public use, a process that would take years!

A rescue mission, involving children on top of that, is not exactly the most appropriate venue to test a new device for the first time!

 

Edited July 17, 2018 by Brunolem