JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 My only comment to the above is that, if Mr. Unsworth were living in UK, that would make sense. However, as he is living in Thailand where there is widespread belief in UK and US that older men go to Thailand and surrounding countries for nefarious purposes, it might not hold up that Musk's use of the 'pedo' word was 100% benign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 38 minutes ago, JLCrab said: My only comment to the above is that, if Mr. Unsworth were living in UK, that would make sense. However, as he is living in Thailand where there is widespread belief in UK and US that older men go to Thailand and surrounding countries for nefarious purposes, it might not hold up that Musk's use of the 'pedo' word was 100% benign. In addition: Defamation per seEdit All states except Arizona, Missouri, and Tennessee recognize that some categories of false statements are so innately harmful that they are considered to be defamatory per se. In the common law tradition, damages for such false statements are presumed and do not have to be proven. Statements are defamatory per se where they falsely impute to the plaintiff one or more of the following things:[2] Allegations or imputations "injurious to another in their trade, business, or profession" Allegations or imputations "of loathsome disease" (historically leprosy and sexually transmitted disease, now also including mental illness) Allegations or imputations of "unchastity" (usually only in unmarried people and sometimes only in women) Allegations or imputations of criminal activity (sometimes only crimes of moral turpitude)[12][13] The last bullet point is interesting. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upu2 Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 58 minutes ago, Monomial said: 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. Maybe Musk is preparing himself to run for President Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 (edited) 30 minutes ago, grollies said: In addition: Defamation per seEdit <snip> Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law When are you going to realize that the laws for libel/defamation plaintiff public persons such as Unsworth would likely be in this case -- simply as he became one on CNN before Musk likely even knew he existed -- are different than for private persons. Even the law firm link you earlier posted noted that. What constitutes a public person on an individual case is well structured in California statute and case law. Edited July 23, 2018 by JLCrab Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, JLCrab said: When are you going to realize that the laws for libel/defamation plaintiff public persons such as Unsworth would likely be in this case -- simply as he became one on CNN before Musk likely even knew he existed -- are different than for private persons. Even the law firm link you earlier posted noted that. What constitutes a public person on an individual case is well structured in California statute and case law. OK, but it can be argued that Unsworth is a private individual and only the media attention turned him into a 'public figure'. I'm done here anyway, wait for any legal action to arise and good to chat with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, grollies said: OK, but it can be argued that Unsworth is a private individual and only the media attention turned him into a 'public figure'. . I'm done here anyway, wait for any legal action to arise and good to chat with you. The media attention to Unsworth was because he chose to make comments specifically related to the case and not incidental to the case. It is not subjective that he chose to make derogatory comments about Musk as a "person who voluntarily injects herself or is drawn into a particular public controversy." Unsworth's public profile on CNN came BEFORE Musk made his tweets so you can't say that he became a public person because of Musk. Maybe you could post some insightful comments on UK libel law Edited July 23, 2018 by JLCrab 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 9 minutes ago, JLCrab said: The media attention to Unsworth was because he chose to make comments specifically related to the case and not incidental to the case. It is not subjective that he chose to make derogatory comments about Musk as a "person who voluntarily injects herself or is drawn into a particular public controversy." Unsworth's public profile on CNN came BEFORE Musk made his tweets so you can't say that he beacme a public person because of Musk. Maybe you could post some insightful comments on UK libel law Sorry. I must have missed the bit where Vern Unsworth accused Elon Musk of being an intravenous drug-using transexual. Please provide a link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 Ah, you mean 'injecting' the pod where it hurts 55555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monomial Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 53 minutes ago, grollies said: In addition: Defamation per seEdit All states except Arizona, Missouri, and Tennessee recognize that some categories of false statements are so innately harmful that they are considered to be defamatory per se. In the common law tradition, damages for such false statements are presumed and do not have to be proven. Statements are defamatory per se where they falsely impute to the plaintiff one or more of the following things:[2] Allegations or imputations "injurious to another in their trade, business, or profession" Allegations or imputations "of loathsome disease" (historically leprosy and sexually transmitted disease, now also including mental illness) Allegations or imputations of "unchastity" (usually only in unmarried people and sometimes only in women) Allegations or imputations of criminal activity (sometimes only crimes of moral turpitude)[12][13] The last bullet point is interesting. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law This is all true. But since Musk has already clarified in his rather questionable public apology/statement that he did not intend to accuse the Brit of actual pedophilia, it would be difficult to make any of this apply. As to whether or not it is a special case because Vern is located in Thailand rather than another country, well...that would require an average person in the United States to know anything about Thailand, which is a real stretch. People in the UK may not realize just how ignorant about the world most Americans are. The average American is not going to be able to associate Thailand with pedophiles. "You mean Taiwan? Yeah, I hate the Chinese. Beijing, Bangkok, aren't they the same?" This is all ridiculous in my opinion. There is no legal basis for a lawsuit here. Is Musk an ass? Of course. There is no doubt he is a boil on the armpit of humanity. But this just doesn't rise to the level of a lawsuit. It is stupid, and the media and lawyers are just milking this story in the hopes of extorting money. They should go cover something of value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, Monomial said: But since Musk has already clarified in his rather questionable public apology/statement that he did not intend to accuse the Brit of actual pedophilia, it would be difficult to make any of this apply. ''Bet you a signed dollar it's true''? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 (edited) I don't think there is any question that Musk used the word 'pedo' in reference to older guys living in Thailand but not as in criminal activity. But I think, as almost certainly in the US Unsworth would be considered as a public figure in the context of this case, his chances of winning at least in California or the US elsewhere would be minimal. Edited July 23, 2018 by JLCrab 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 27 minutes ago, JLCrab said: Maybe you could post some insightful comments on UK libel law It's all explained here: www.urban75.org/info/libel.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 Thank you. Now I know who is Peter Sutcliffe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 20 minutes ago, JLCrab said: don't think there is any question that Musk used the word 'pedo' in reference to older guys living in Thailand but not as in criminal activity. OK, can you expand on where you think paedophilia is not considered a criminal activity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, JLCrab said: Thank you. Now I know who is Peter Sutcliffe. And you understand the basics of UK libel law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canopy Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 5 hours ago, Spidey said: The Brit, being polite, basically said "up to you". This is complete nonsense that you made up. Richard Stanton, one of two British divers that found the kids said this to musk: "It is absolutely worth continuing with the development of this system in as timely a manner as feasible. If the rain holds out it may well be used" So get your facts straight. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 38 minutes ago, grollies said: Sorry. I must have missed the bit where Vern Unsworth accused Elon Musk of being an intravenous drug-using transexual. Please provide a link. The word 'injects' as in a person who voluntarily injects himself into a public controversy comes straight from a US Supreme Court opinion and is the basis for the California definition of case-specific public person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 8 minutes ago, grollies said: OK, can you expand on where you think paedophilia is not considered a criminal activity? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, JLCrab said: The word 'injects' as in a person who voluntarily injects himself into a public controversy comes straight from a US Supreme Court opinion and is the basis for the California definition of case-specific public person. I realise you meant 'himself' instead of typing 'herself'. Had you placed a comma after 'herself' it would have given a whole different meaning to your sentence. Edited July 23, 2018 by grollies there you go, typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canopy Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 6 hours ago, DILLIGAD said: If your right, why didn’t he get one of his thousands of employee’s to go to the cave? That happened right away. Elon sent engineers to the cave to, as he put it, understand things you could only learn by being there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, JLCrab said: No. OK, so you admit defeat on that comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 1 minute ago, canopy said: That happened right away. Elon sent engineers to the cave to, as he put it, understand things you could only learn by being there. Which is why, when presented with a 15" wide gap to negotiate, they produced a pod twice the diameter? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, grollies said: OK, so you admit defeat on that comment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, JLCrab said: Wouldn't this be more appropriate? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ29pVhsdMs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 51 minutes ago, grollies said: Wouldn't this be more appropriate? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canopy Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 1 hour ago, grollies said: Which is why, when presented with a 15" wide gap to negotiate, they produced a pod twice the diameter? Different subs were designed for different sections. You mean you didn't know? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamyai3 Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 Read an opinion piece in The Times at the weekend, in which Jeremy Clarkson makes some amusing comments comparing Musk to Brains from Thunderbirds, flying in with his space age contraption from Tracy Island. The article is subscription only so not worth linking to it, but it concludes hoping that Unsworth goes ahead and sues. Clarkson's personal history with Musk involves the latter trying to sue him and the BBC back in 2011 for mocking the Tesla car battery range. Although this lawsuit failed, it indicates how tenacious an opponent Musk can be when he feels he's been publicly slighted on a high profile platform. https://www.inverse.com/article/39254-elon-musk-slammed-as-petulant-by-jeremy-clarkson-over-tesla-lawsuit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 20 hours ago, canopy said: Different subs were designed for different sections. You mean you didn't know? Yeah, commissioned by Musk. Seals with Velcro apparently. Glad to see they managed to get a company logo on it. I believe it was dismissed as unsuitable, as was the capsule for that particular use. I'm not dismissing any of these contraptions you know, good on Musk and the rest for trying. But, there was no need for the petulant dummy-spitting from Musk is all. Even the polite rejection of the capsule from the Thai rescue co-ordinator was met with a nasty tweet. To label Unsworth a paedophile in response was disgraceful and I hope Unsworth sues. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 16 minutes ago, grollies said: <snp> I hope Unsworth sues. I hope he sues, too. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grollies Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, JLCrab said: I hope he sues, too. So do I. What's the bet? B1,000 on Unsworth win, you up for it? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now