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

 

23 hours ago, dufusdonald said:

I suggest and have suggested Mr Unsworth brought this whole debacle upon himself for no reason whatsoever that makes any sense. He lied about it being a PR stunt (Musk was asked to help), he lied when he said the sub did not work (it does) and he suggested Musk assault himself with his sub. 

 

Unsworth also posed for the taping his shoe photo that got worldwide recognition so he is a phony hypocrite. He took credit for helping to save the kids when he wasn't even a diver.  

 

Musk as a globally recognized person should not have used the term, Pedo. He has apologized. Unsworth has not.

 

I hope Unsworth sues and Musk countersues.  Should be fun.

 

You have presented statements that are inaccurate and factually incorrect.

1. 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? Why would a responsible person recommend a vessel that was;

a. Untested, uncertified and unapproved and

b. Too big to be used in the confined space of the cave passages.

 

Had the tunnel been dry, it would have been the same as suggesting the use of a small kia to transport out the   kids, or even the use of a scooter and wagon. It was obvious from every single diagram that a mini submarine would not get past the first area. Why then would someone promote an untested, and unknown device that was completely and absolutely inappropriate for the intended use?

 

2. The Musk companies were initially contacted in respect to location finding equipment to assist in pinpointing the kids' location, and then water pumps and heavy-duty battery packs. These items were obviously more practicable.

 

3. In respect to your dismissal of Unsworth because he wasn't a diver, you are oblivious to the structure of any complex mission. You assume that only the divers are responsible for the success. A complex mission requires logistics, planning, and preparation. The folks behind the scenes make it happen. When a  spaceship takes off do you think that only the astronauts are involved and that the thousands of specialists and experts who designed the systems, who guided the mission, who anticipated problems and then solved them are not integral?  Isn't Unsworth acknowledged as the co-lead on this operation's initiation? Wasn't he the one who had the detailed knowledge of the  cave and wasn't he the one who reached out and  brought in the foreign experts based upon his experience and knowledge? He was humble and never attempted to gain credit, nor fame going out of his way to tell reporters that he would prefer they did not use the term hero to describe him.

 

4. Musk did not provide a clear apology. Instead he couched his words still attempting to escape responsibility for his petulant tantrum. This is not the first time he has done this. The man is smart but has no self control and it has caused him years of emotional pain and loneliness. The quality that makes him successful at creating also  holds him back.

 

5. Why would you want to see anyone get into a conflict and "sue"? What good does it do anyone. Musk should have just come clean and said sorry and walked away. Unsworth could have then said ok and  carried on.

 

16 hours ago, tumama said:

You guys are arguing semantics. You're being just as childish as they are being.

 

1. The hero diver should not have jumped to conclusions about Elon's motive and publicly tell the world that he should stick his "submarine" somewhere.

 

2. Elon Musk should have acted like an adult and faced the criticism in an grown up manner. 

 

3. The hero diver should have just ignored that pedo comment.

 

4. The mother should have kept her mouth shut.

 

I really don't see what other conclusions to come to here. 

 

 

Stop calling him a hero as he does not wish to be called a hero and to be blunt he wasn't a hero. He was in the tight place at the right time with the right knowledge and experience.

 

He had every right to defend against the pedo coment. Making such a claim against an older male in Thailand is the kiss of death. People outside of the country assume that the farangs here are sexpats and pedos. There is a reason why customs and immigration in Canada and the USA have asked me several times if I have ever been to Pattaya. It is no secret that hills tribe and Myanmar refugees are sex trafficked and sexploited in Chiang Rai. Using the term pedo is intentionally malicious and seeks to destroy a person.

 

You bet his mum would have reacted  in the way she did. If your son was falsely accused of being a pedophile would you not react harshly, particularly when such a claim is the equivalent of a  protracted death sentence?  The taint of the accusation will continue for years and destroy's a man's reputation. What Musk did was so very evil and was the equivalent of calling for the death of a man who had  done no wrong. This iswhy so many people and investors have reacted in the way they did. Musk didn't just hurt himself, but hurt the customers, investors and employees of his business empire, an empire which needs the support and goodwill of these people to continue.

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.

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.

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 July 23, 20187 yr by JLCrab

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?

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?

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.

1 minute ago, Naam said:

who's going for a judgment? the Brit?

Unsworth says he's taking advice to sue for Musk calling him a paedophile.

 

Wouldn't you?

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 July 23, 20187 yr by JLCrab

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.

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.

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 July 23, 20187 yr by JLCrab

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.

 

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

 
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

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 July 23, 20187 yr by JLCrab

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

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 July 23, 20187 yr by JLCrab

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.

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. 

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 July 23, 20187 yr by JLCrab

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.

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. 

2 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

That is his problem <snip>

Yes and given who he is, that is why it is news.

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.

 

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.

I wonder if Musk wants to launch himself into space in the near future, to avoid Vern's mom ? 

 

 

Edited July 23, 20187 yr by balo

I think she will have to wait in line for that

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.