Jump to content

'HE NEEDS HIS MOUTH TAPED UP' Mum of hero British caver says Elon Musk should be ‘put up against a wall and shot’ for calling her son a ‘paedo’


rooster59

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, 473geo said:

In a situation where adverse comments be deemed 'Character assassination' - then they may well cross the legal line.

maybe, but even if character assassination, i dont think a judge (or anyone sane person actually) would consider the appropriate response would be to call him a paedo.

 

That is probably even breaking some sort of sexual harrassment laws in some countries.

 

so maybe if Thai style, they treat both seperate:

Verns crime: fine THB 500

Musk crime: fine THB 2million

5555

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2018 at 8:28 AM, bluesofa said:

I wonder what Elon Musk's mum's response was?

Will it be handbags at dawn? If so, who has the film rights for this one?

 

She's likely too busy as a working model to be bothered with this nonsense. Maye Musk is quite popular in certain circles on her own accord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grollies said:
3 hours ago, JLCrab said:

The thing most people on here seem to miss is that, at least in California, the degree to which "Stick his ..." and 'pedo' is the greater or lesser insult would likely not be the main determining factor in a libel case judgment.

 

And that comes straight out of California Civil Code, not my opinion.

Here is an informative link on California deformation law.

 

http://kellywarnerlaw.com/california-defamation-laws/

can any kind soul enlighten me what california defamation laws and/or civil code have to do with a Brit who is in my [not so] humble view horribly insulted because he lives in Thailand?

 

the insult is not less even when taking into consideration that Elon Musk is a pathological liar and braggart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grollies said:

Here is an informative link on California deformation law.

 

http://kellywarnerlaw.com/california-defamation-laws/

 

Note the distinction between Private versus public figures in the above link as due, to his newfound public exposure on CNN and other media which is not incidental to the case, he may be considered a public figure specifically in regards to this case should he initiate legal action in the state of California.

 

And to the above, Musk is a resident of California and that is where probably are the bulk of his personal assets (unless they are all registered in Vanuatu)

Edited by JLCrab
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Naam said:

can any kind soul enlighten me what california defamation laws and/or civil code have to do with a Brit who is in my [not so] humble view horribly insulted because he lives in Thailand?

 

the insult is not less even when taking into consideration that Elon Musk is a pathological liar and braggart.

Because Musk lives in California? Apparently, foreign libel judgement is unenforceable in the US unless that judgement is compliant with the US First Amendment.

 

Any judgement in Thailand or the UK wouldn't be valid in the US?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, grollies said:

Because Musk lives in California? Apparently, foreign libel judgement is unenforceable in the US unless that judgement is compliant with the US First Amendment.

 

Any judgement in Thailand or the UK wouldn't be valid in the US?

who's going for a judgment? the Brit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Note the distinction between Private versus public figures in the above link as due, to his newfound public exposure on CNN and other media which is not incidental to the case, he may be considered a public figure specifically in regards to this case should he initiate legal action in the state of California.

 

And to the above, Musk is a resident of California and that is where probably are the bulk of his personal assets (unless they are all registered in Vanuatu)

Except that ''In California, the media, however, is barred from making a private figure into a public figure simply by running a story about that person.''

 

However, this is getting rather speculative and non of us here are lawyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Guardian -- https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/16/british-diver-in-thai-cave-rescue-stunned-after-attack-by-elon-musk

 

Mark Stephens, a partner at the London law firm Howard Kennedy, said: “It’s a cast iron case of libel and [Unsworth] will undoubtedly be able to sue. [If he sued] he would get damages and award of costs. They would be substantial, probably around £125,000. The challenge is that he would have to find assets of Musk’s outside of the America.”

 

The US Speech Act, Stephens explained, prevents libel judgments in the UK and elsewhere being enforced in the US on the grounds that they undermine American standards of free speech.

 

“The alternative,” Stephens said, “is to ask a British court to apply US law [standards] in its judgment so that it can be enforced in America, or he could sue in US courts, where awards are significantly higher. For such a false allegation he would get half a million to a million dollars.”

*******

 

But in the above interview, I will presume that Mr. Stephens is considering that Unsworth would be suing as a private individual which might, under California law, not be the case.

 

And the definition under California law as to who is a public vs. private individual in a libel/defamation case originates in the US Supreme Court so it is not subjective.

Edited by JLCrab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, grollies said:

Except that ''In California, the media, however, is barred from making a private figure into a public figure simply by running a story about that person.''

 

However, this is getting rather speculative and non of us here are lawyers.

Yes but the exception above is where the media coverage is incidental to the case and the legal deifintion in California of 'limited purpose public figure' clearly makes that distinction.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Yes but the exception above is where the media coverage is incidental to the case and the legal deifintion in California of 'limited purpose public figure' clearly makes that distinction.

Should be interesting to follow if Unsworth picks up the baton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may be the biggest trial to hit LA since the OJ Simpson spectacle.

 

It may also be very entertaining especially if Unsworth is deemed a public figure in which case he as the plaintiff may have to prove the charges (pedo) untrue rather than as a private individual where the defendant (in this case Musk) has to prove that the charegs ARE true.

 

How do you prove that you are NOT a pedo?

Edited by JLCrab
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

Unsworth did not bring this on himself when he dismissed the use of the minisubmarine as a publicity stunt. What other way to describe such a contraption that was inappropriate for the task at hand?

 

The idea of the sub came from the cave experts in Thailand. The precise design specifications were provided to elon directly from experts who had made the crucial dive. The experts asked for the sub, elon delivered. There is no publicity stunt here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst it isn't very nice to call someone a child molester, people with brains won't consider execution a fitting punishment. Maybe it would be better to keep quiet, as this response is even more ludicrous.

It seems all involved have anger issues and a severe lack of common sense. Why is this even news I wonder.

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
The idea of the sub came from the cave experts in Thailand. The precise design specifications were provided to elon directly from experts who had made the crucial dive. The experts asked for the sub, elon delivered. There is no publicity stunt here.
 

If your right, why didn’t he get one of his thousands of employee’s to go to the cave?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

<snip> Why is this even news I wonder.

The reason the Unsworth-Musk spat is news I guess is that the football team boys and their coach trapped in the cave saga was front page and lead story TV news all over the world for about 2 weeks.

Edited by JLCrab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason the Unsworth-Musk spat is news I guess is that the football team boys and their coach trapped in the cave saga was front page and lead story TV news all over the world for about 2 weeks.
Yes, and now it is time to move on. Enough already.

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Yes, and now it is time to move on. Enough already.

(EDIT) Unsworth's last public comment to the media was

 

"It's not finished...I believe he's called me a 'paedophile'...I think people realise what sort of guy he is."

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44870303

 

He is now in UK presumably assessing his legal options. Stay tuned.

Edited by JLCrab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, canopy said:

 

The idea of the sub came from the cave experts in Thailand. The precise design specifications were provided to elon directly from experts who had made the crucial dive. The experts asked for the sub, elon delivered. There is no publicity stunt here.

 

Utter claptrap. The dilemma was pointed out to Musk, on Twitter, by a young Thai girl living in the US. He offered his help and a brief email exchange took place between the leader of the rescue team (British) who had better things to do, and Musk. The Brit, being polite, basically said "up to you". When he turned up with the heap of junk, he was basically told to stick it by both the local governor leading the rescue and the rescue divers. No one provided any specs or design input.

 

!00% a publicity stunt by Musk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Unsworth's last public comment to the media was: This isn't over.

 

He is now in UK presumably assessing his legal options. Stay tuned.

Oh I understand he wants to keep himself in the picture, let me rephrase, for me this is over. This childish exchange just shows the class of all the people involved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Oh I understand he wants to keep himself in the picture, let me rephrase, for me this is over. This childish exchange just shows the class of all the people involved. 

Well OK but if your are the CEO of major corporations with a substantial personal net worth and someone with reasonable cause threatens you with legal action you don't just ignore it until it is resolved.

Edited by JLCrab
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JLCrab said:

Note the distinction between Private versus public figures in the above link as due, to his newfound public exposure on CNN and other media which is not incidental to the case, he may be considered a public figure specifically in regards to this case should he initiate legal action in the state of California.

 

And to the above, Musk is a resident of California and that is where probably are the bulk of his personal assets (unless they are all registered in Vanuatu)

Mr. Musk has the benefit of  a team of qualified and experienced tax lawyers, tax accountants and  estate managers. He will have placed much of his assets in jurisdictions where they are subject to the lowest tax  possible and where people cannot get at them.  Keep in mind that with two failed marriages and 5 children's custody and support agreements settled he's had the benefit of trying out his estate protection and planning plans.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Well OK but if your are the CEO of major corporations with a substantial personal net worth and someone with reasonable cause threatens you with legal action you don't just ignore it until it is resolved.

That is his problem not mine ? No news, I didn't even hear of the bloke before this whole saga. It's not like he cannot afford such a lawsuit apparently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stick up the arse most times doesn’t literally that......an expression 

shall we say. But  Musk thought it was literal and I forgot how he 

termed it but much like some egineers a more detailed term. 

Musk probably doesn’t get anyone telling him to stick it...

 

Had a a double E electrical aerospace engineer in our office very talented. Made the mistake idle chit chat I wonder how that the water Dispenser heats the water.... 1 hour later (literally) Never asked again.

 

Hope the two could sit down over a beer say each of us messed up

move on lesson learned.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DJ54 said:

<snip>

Hope the two could sit down over a beer say each of us messed up

move on lesson learned.

Nice sentiment but, as Unsworth is in UK right now likely discussing his options with attorneys, maybe too late for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What many people who are not familiar with the US system don't realize is that much of the law in cases like this is dependent on context and not technicalities like criminal cases.  Any lawsuit against Musk would have to establish first that the Brit was materially damaged by Musk's statement, and that would mean proving in court that a reasonable person listening to this exchange actually thought he was really a pedophile, and not that Musk was just expressing a generic obscenity.

 

Chances are, the most he could hope for with a lawsuit is a public statement by Musk that he was just using the term paedo as a colorful metaphor, and that he has no reason to believe the Brit is really a pedophile. And as Musk has already said as much, it seems there is nothing left to sue about. It is hard for me to imagine anyone was actually damaged by any of this, and I think a judge would politely (or not so politely) ask both sides to get out of the courtroom and stop wasting everyone's time.

 

The lawyers who are advising him to sue are likely just looking for a quick payday, gambling that Musk would rather pay a few thousand dollars to avoid the annoyance of a suit. Musk is your typical corporate CEO psychopath and should have known better before running his mouth off, but really the media should just stop trying to play this up for ratings. This is a non story.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...