Tesla's Musk says British Thai cave rescuer's defamation case should be dismissed

[Nyezhov]

40 minutes ago, Burma Bill said:

Looks as if "brown envelopes" exist in California! . The Boring Company just about sums up Musk but "abnoxious" would be a great addition to the name in my opinion.

Speaking as someone who considers California to be the Anus Mundi, what makes you think that there are brown envelopes in California?

[KneeDeep]

His own words will choke him.

 

July 18th 2018;

 

Quote

On Wednesday morning, Mr Musk responded to a Twitter user who had shared an article about the dispute, saying: "My words were spoken in anger after Mr Unsworth said several untruths & suggested I engage in a sexual act with the mini-sub, which had been built as an act of kindness and according to specifications from the dive team leader.

"Nonetheless, his actions against me do not justify my actions against him, and for that I apologise to Mr Unsworth and to the companies I represent as leader.

"The fault is mine and mine alone."

 

That might have been the end of it, had he not decided to do it again.

 

The man is an arse and making his investors nervous; https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/17/tesla-elon-musk-thailand-diver-pedo

 

His supporters claim that he has a legal case, but are unable to spell it out when requested.

 

I can do it for them. His case is that his statements were opinion. Errmmm....no. Vernon's remarks were an opinion.

Whereas Musk went to great lengths to convince the public that Vernon really is a paedophile.

 

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/elon-musk-thai-cave-rescuer-accusations-buzzfeed-email

 

Called him a child rapist amongst other things.

 

 

[KneeDeep]

From what I understand, they are trying to get the Twitter comments thrown out, as posts on Twitter are known to be full of invective and exaggeration and the subsequent Buzzfeed emails too because they were supposed to be off the record.

 

Can't see the Twitter thing working or that would give rise to anyone saying anything about anyone, being free of the burden of proof and being protected by the law to do so.

 

No one is going to endorse that. The Buzzfeed comments are different, as it was Buzzfeed who aired the comments. So I don't know how that would be treated.

 

The other issue is that there might be claims filed in other jurisdictions, Thailand included.

Musk would have been better off making a public donation to charity to make the whole thing go away.

Instead the idiot is just keeping firms of lawyers in coin.

 

[KneeDeep]

.....and don't underestimate Mr Unsworth's wife. ???? British men have a sense of fairness and will come to a reasonable agreement any day, rather than have conflict.

But upset a man's wife.....

 

Vernon had no option but to sue....and I don't even know him. ????

 

 

[sanemax]

Musk is lying once again , stating that it was just playground banter than no one would believe . 

  He made a direct false allegation which he cannot substantiate and now hes trying to use the "I was only messing about " excuse  .

  No you wasnt , he made real accusations , trying to destroy Vern , because Vern had the audacity to question Musks intentions .

   Musk has already been fined $20 Million for lying this year, hopefully this case will put an end to him , proving what a dishonest liar he is   

[JLCrab]

8 hours ago, KneeDeep said:

His supporters claim that he has a legal case, but are unable to spell it out when requested

Musk does have a legal case which his attorneys have spelled out in their recent "Motion to Dismiss" filing in response to Unworth's attorney's "Complaint for Defamation" filing in September 2018 neither of which I will presume you have read.

Edited December 28, 2018 by JLCrab

[scorecard]

7 hours ago, KneeDeep said:

From what I understand, they are trying to get the Twitter comments thrown out, as posts on Twitter are known to be full of invective and exaggeration and the subsequent Buzzfeed emails too because they were supposed to be off the record.

 

Can't see the Twitter thing working or that would give rise to anyone saying anything about anyone, being free of the burden of proof and being protected by the law to do so.

 

No one is going to endorse that. The Buzzfeed comments are different, as it was Buzzfeed who aired the comments. So I don't know how that would be treated.

 

The other issue is that there might be claims filed in other jurisdictions, Thailand included.

Musk would have been better off making a public donation to charity to make the whole thing go away.

Instead the idiot is just keeping firms of lawyers in coin.

 

...."Can't see the Twitter thing working or that would give rise to anyone saying anything about anyone, being free of the burden of proof and being protected by the law to do so."

 

Also meaning that twitter has some sudden situation where it's outside of mainstream laws and it has a special 'permission' whereby contributors are allowed to say anything they want without explanation or proof and the target can't demand recourse and in fact the contributor being protected from conviction or punishment by law.

 

If this is the best musks' lawyers can come up with he needs new lawyers.

 

plus the judge (it it went to a court) should reprimand the lawyers for making suggestions like this with no respect for ethics, civility and morality plus reprimand them for bringing the profession into a situation where they are seen as massively unprofessional, fine them USD100 Million each and ban them from practicing law forever after they have all apologized to the public. 

 

 

 

[JLCrab]

9 minutes ago, scorecard said:

If this is the best musks' lawyers can come up with he needs new lawyers.

Musk's lawyers have come up with this because multiple Appeals Court decisions already have.

[lamyai3]

15 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Vernon sue Musk.

Sue is his middle name? Lousy thing for his parents to do, even if they were really hoping for a daughter. 

[JLCrab]

BTW from the website of Musk's lead defense attorney:

 

“He doesn’t just win. He destroys.”
-Los Angeles Times

[lamyai3]

13 hours ago, stevemac said:

Actually, I think Vern has shown a lot of humility in this situation. Appeared very humble where he could have come back all guns blazing. It was only after Elons continued escalation that he launched the legal action. Even then he did not resort to childish and unfounded insults/ defamation.

Yes, he's been pretty restrained, avoiding rising to the bait of such an undignified slur. The only comments he made were limited in scope to the suitability of the mini-sub in the rescue effort, and to what he saw as Musk's self aggrandizing behaviour. If he'd wanted to attack back on the pedo front he'd have had plenty to work with, not least some of the unflattering press Musk was getting elsewhere that same month... 

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/relationships/dating/people-are-losing-it-over-photo-of-elon-musk-his-girlfriend-and-his-son/news-story/6416088b2b7476ccf0bc0c24a2f93f21

 

Exoneration of Unsworth's character came from various quarters, including his girlfriend (age 40, ten years older than Musk's own girlfriend!), and the other members of the cave operation.

[JLCrab]

8 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Yes, he's been pretty restrained,

Yes very restrained -- Musk made his first 'pedo' comments 15 JUL 2018 and Unsworth was telling various media 16 JUL 2018 per BBC:

 

Mr Unsworth told reporters on Monday that he was considering legal action.

"It's not finished," he told Australian network Channel 7.

[lamyai3]

18 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Yes very restrained -- Musk made his first 'pedo' comments 15 JUL 2018 and Unsworth was telling various media 16 JUL 2018 per BBC:

 

Mr Unsworth told reporters on Monday that he was considering legal action.

"It's not finished," he told Australian network Channel 7.

This was an appropriate and timely response to Musk's outrageous comment, and don't forget the world media was badgering him for a response, he didn't put out this statement himself.

 

Unsworth's reactions to the pedo comments have been extremely restrained and pretty much exemplary, as if he's refused to stoop to that level of debate. The only people who have spoken up for him are those around him (though I can imagine he might have had a quiet word with his mum to pipe down a bit).

 

I agree with your earlier opinion that the main issue of significance in the US court is likely to be the "PR stunt" comment rather than the "stick it" one (which everyone knows is a colloquialism in any English speaking country). It was poor judgment for Unsworth to have made that comment on CNN as it questions Musk's sincerity in wanting to help out in the cave rescue effort, but as a public figure Musk had many dignified ways in which he could have responded to this, he could hardly have chosen a worse option than the one he did. 

[JLCrab]

10 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

This was an appropriate and timely response to Musk's outrageous comment, and don't forget the world media was badgering him for a response, he didn't put out this statement himself.

He could have just said "I am not a pedo" and left it at that but went on to say "This is not finished".

 

However now that his Atlanta-based attorneys have filed a defamation complaint in Central District California US Federal court, what is actually in the complaint is what is germane

 

It is however amusing to read comments on here to the effect that Unsworth's lawyers should just say or do XYZ when there have been multiple previous Appeals court decisions in the US that have said that, in a defamation case, you cannot do XYZ.

[lamyai3]

9 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

It is however amusing to read comments on here to the effect that Unsworth's lawyers should just say or do XYZ when there have been multiple previous Appeals court decisions in the US that have said that, in a defamation case, you cannot do XYZ.

As a "veteran of media legal circuses" I'm sure Unsworth's lawyers know what they're doing. 

[JLCrab]

9 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

As a "veteran of media legal circuses" I'm sure Unsworth's lawyers know what they're doing. 

Sure but people posting on here don't.

[KC 71]

Vern is a friend of mine,if it was me i would take the muppet to the cleaners


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[metisdead]

Some inflammatory and off topic grammar police troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

[rustinorman]

On 12/28/2018 at 8:06 AM, JAG said:

We visited the new memorial pavilion at the caves on Boxing Day. Rather good, there is an impressive larger than life bronze statue of a rescue diver, with 13 wild boar piglets frisking around his feet. There is a large mural painting telling the story. The centre is a portrait of the man who died, which is as it should be. Just about every aspect of the operation is depicted, starting with the row of bicycles outside, every nation and contribution features, and some of the key players, Thai and foreign. It really is rather impressive.

 

No sign of Mr Musk or his submarine.

 

He looks like Musk

 

[GroveHillWanderer]

3 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

I agree with your earlier opinion that the main issue of significance in the US court is likely to be the "PR stunt" comment rather than the "stick it" one (which everyone knows is a colloquialism in any English speaking country).

Unsworth's comments about Musk are not relevant to this case. The main (and only) issue is a determination of whether Musk's statements about Unsworth amounted to defamation. In making a legal determination as to the nature of Musk's comments, anything Unsworth said about Musk is entirely irrelevant. 

[JLCrab]

11 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

In making a legal determination as to the nature of Musk's comments, anything Unsworth said about Musk is entirely irrelevant. 

Sez hoo?

[JAG]

56 minutes ago, rustinorman said:

 

He looks like Musk

 

Maybe it is him - I wasn't specifically looking for Musk when I looked at the mural.

[lamyai3]

52 minutes ago, rustinorman said:

He looks like Musk

 

Not sure if it's deliberate, but I notice rescue chief Narongsak (who's credentials Musk had questioned a few days earlier) is in prime position to spit on his head.

 

The mini-sub is there in the pic too underneath Musk, some of the larger characters have been using it as a vape. 

[HAKAPALITA]

12 minutes ago, JAG said:

Maybe it is him - I wasn't specifically looking for Musk when I looked at the mural.

I think being a Bob Geldorkf lookalike must be one of natures cruellest tricks.That Irish chap whatever his name is!!

[GroveHillWanderer]

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

Sez hoo?

Just think about it for a minute, I'm sure you'll get there. You can't judge whether one person's words were defamatory or not, by looking at a completely different person's words (unless of course, they were the words of the person allegedly being defamed, admitting that what was said about them was true, which is not the case here).

Edited December 29, 2018 by GroveHillWanderer

[JLCrab]

7 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

Sez hoo?

Just think about it for a minute, I'm sure you'll get there.

It's not a matter of my getting there. Musk's lawyers in their motion to dismiss already are in disagreement with your statement that anything Unsworth said on CNN is irrelevant.

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

It's not a matter of my getting there. Musk's lawyers in their motion to dismiss already are in disagreement with your statement that anything Unsworth said on CNN is irrelevant.

Vern is taking Musk to Court for what he said .

[JLCrab]

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

It's not a matter of my getting there. Musk's lawyers in their motion to dismiss already are in disagreement with your statement that anything Unsworth said on CNN is irrelevant.

Vern is taking Musk to Court for what he said .

Maybe so but that hardly makes what what Unsworth said on CNN, which precipitated this whole chain of events, "not relevant" especially in determining procedural matters should this case ever go to trial.

[sanemax]

Just now, JLCrab said:

Maybe so but that hardly makes what what Unsworth said on CNN, which precipitated this whole chain of events, "not relevant" especially in determining procedural matters should this case ever go to trial.

The "he started it " defence would not be acceptable .

Had Vern initially made similar accusations , Musk may have then had a case .

Vern just gave an opinion  , which isnt illegal and therefore its irrelevant .

Musk made untrue accusations and that is an illegal thing to do .  

Musk broke the law , Vern didnt break any laws .

Musk is in trail, Vern isnt 

[JLCrab]

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

9 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

 

The "he started it " defence would not be acceptable .

Well I wouldn't put it quite in those terms but the US Supreme Court disagrees with you.

Edited December 29, 2018 by JLCrab