As many of our readers will know,  Elon Musk was found not guilty in the case of calling another person 'paedo guy'.  The case revolved around whether or not calling someone paedo guy is defamatory.    Which of the following best describes your assessment of the case and social media in general.

 

Please feel free to leave a comment.

 

Not guilty, not innocent and not crazy, just a very clever business man that know how to make cheap advertising!

How about: Guilty of being part of the billionaire class who think they can treat anyone like cr@p and get away with it

How about asking for way to many millions 

35 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

How about: Guilty of being part of the billionaire class who think they can treat anyone like cr@p and get away with it

Didn't Vern insult him first and cause all this....or is it ok for vern to treat others like cr@p and get away with it in your book....

The lack of members' interest in this poll speaks volumes!

19 minutes ago, theonetrueaussie said:

Didn't Vern insult him first and cause all this....or is it ok for vern to treat others like cr@p and get away with it in your book....

Or was what Vern said the truth? I haven't seen any reports of Musk denying it. In any case it's no justification for implying he's a paedophile or a "child rapist". 

Troll post removed

The man is a visionary who will take us all to Mars and ensure the survival of our species. Support him.

Case has been tried and decided.

 

If he would have gone for a reasonable damages claim, maybe I would be more supportive of him. 

 

Nearly 200 million dollars is laughable given his life and likely has severely damaged his reputation. 

 

It'd be like me asking for a missle strike on the BTS because the train was delayed again today.

 

Preposterous 

 

Edited December 9, 20196 yr by Fex Bluse

49 minutes ago, hugh2121 said:

Or was what Vern said the truth? I haven't seen any reports of Musk denying it. In any case it's no justification for implying he's a paedophile or a "child rapist". 

So speaking "the truth" about someone who comes to offer help, whether that help gets accepted or not, is justification in your mind to openly and unprovoked insult that man on national television?

Wow.

You should not use social media anymore if it turns you in a cry baby.

 

1 hour ago, PremiumLane said:

How about: Guilty of being part of the billionaire class who think they can treat anyone like cr@p and get away with it

Who else did he treat like cr@p then?

He only insulted 1 guy, after that guy insulted him first on Television.

Something you would like neither if you were to offer any help.

Seems you blame him to be wrong just because he has money?

Just like Vern was after some money, nothing else

Let's make another survey:

Let's say a rich guy would make a deal with you. You sell him the right to call you a pedo-guy, read by millions of people on Twitter and then reprinted all over the world.

For how much would you sell that right?

Is 1,000 USD enough? Or maybe 10k?

Or should anybody be able to call you such names with out any compensation?

None of the above. He was guilty, he called the guy a paedo. Musk is an ego gone mad and needs reining in. But I don't agree that social media should be regulated, at all.

10 minutes ago, UnkleGoooose said:

None of the above. He was guilty, he called the guy a paedo. Musk is an ego gone mad and needs reining in. But I don't agree that social media should be regulated, at all.

Social media would become a platform for people to write illegal things , and say things they couldnt say in public

Before voting go read the text messages Unsworth sent where he threatens to make the other divers suffer and calls the Thai Divers Kwai(Buffalo) and talks about how much money he will earn.
I think this was the reason the Jury voted not guilty it would have change my mind as well.

Guilty but not $200m guilty

 

34 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Before voting go read the text messages Unsworth sent where he threatens to make the other divers suffer and calls the Thai Divers Kwai(Buffalo) and talks about how much money he will earn.
I think this was the reason the Jury voted not guilty it would have change my mind as well.

Please post those text messages on here .

Failure for you to post those texts on here , I will assume that you just made that up and the texts dont exist and were never written by Vern .

Over to you ...............

11 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Please post those text messages on here .

Failure for you to post those texts on here , I will assume that you just made that up and the texts dont exist and were never written by Vern .

Over to you ...............

Ok no problem they are public domain now released in court here's one the rest you can find for here for example or just google for Unsworth Court transcript.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10161208/elon-musk-british-diver-pedo-guy-texts-cash/

 

 

2 hours ago, Fex Bluse said:

Case has been tried and decided.

 

If he would have gone for a reasonable damages claim, maybe I would be more supportive of him. 

 

Nearly 200 million dollars is laughable given his life and likely has severely damaged his reputation. 

 

It'd be like me asking for a missle strike on the BTS because the train was delayed again today.

 

Preposterous 

 

Correct, the amount was more than preposterous, there's not enough adjectives in the English language to describe the stupidity of the legal firm representing him. 

15 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Ok no problem they are public domain now released in court here's one the rest you can find for here for example or just google for Unsworth Court transcript.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10161208/elon-musk-british-diver-pedo-guy-texts-cash/

 

 

Vern was talking about a film company that wanted to make a film about the rescue .

The conversation above had nothing to do with Musk or the Court case , it was a discussion about a Netfix movie and the not too serious remark about the other divers wasnt meant to be literal and he doesnt seem to call them Buffaloes .

   Anyway , that text above has nothing to do with this thread and nothing to do with the Vern/Musk episode , it was about making a film 

Aren't punitive damages related to the wealth of the offender?

190m is not much if you are worth 26bn (0.73% if you can't be bothered to work it out...)

To call a man a pedophile is the worst and most permanently damaging insult that is possible. I believe that Musk knows this and knew exactly what he was saying and doing. I am shocked that he has been found not guilty and I feel very very sorry for Vern.

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

Vern was talking about a film company that wanted to make a film about the rescue .

The conversation above had nothing to do with Musk or the Court case , it was a discussion about a Netfix movie and the not too serious remark about the other divers wasnt meant to be literal and he doesnt seem to call them Buffaloes .

   Anyway , that text above has nothing to do with this thread and nothing to do with the Vern/Musk episode , it was about making a film 

The texts prove he was in it for the $$$$$ and a low life not a nice guy and there are several more go see the link i sent he calls them Kwai which is Thai for Buffalo.

Suing someone for $190 million for a tweet is what I call crazy. Elon is innocent. Unsworth is guilty because he started the mess.

17 minutes ago, monkfish said:

The texts prove he was in it for the $$$$$ and a low life not a nice guy and there are several more go see the link i sent he calls them Kwai which is Thai for Buffalo.

Those texts dont prove that he was in it for the money 

Those texts shows that he was interested in making money from the film after the event .

Of course, if a film company wants to employ you to make a film, of course you are going to ask for financial return .

   But as those negotiations were well after the rescue, that doesnt prove that Vern only did the rescue for financial return .

A jury determines the amount of damages. The amount demanded in the lawsuit is not relevant.  If the defamatory term is subject to interpretation then the case is not a strong one.  The facts are Musk called Mr. Unsworth a “Pedo” in a tweet.  Maybe a different jury in a different location could have come to different verdict.  The trial was held in Federal Court in Los Angeles.  Not that this is relevant but Musk’s Space X is located in Hawthorne(20 miles south of Court House) and Tesla is located in Northern CA.  

All Vern needed to say was that Musk’s plan would have failed, and explained why. I don’t believe Musk did it as a publicity stunt, I think it was a genuine attempt to help. He did not need to insult the guy.

 

Musk’s comments were childish and stupid ... Vern could have dealt with this better than he did. Going into a court in a defamation case is much the same as a casino, and not recommended.

 

 

 

Edited December 9, 20196 yr by AlexRich

27 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Those texts dont prove that he was in it for the money 

Those texts shows that he was interested in making money from the film after the event .

Of course, if a film company wants to employ you to make a film, of course you are going to ask for financial return .

   But as those negotiations were well after the rescue, that doesnt prove that Vern only did the rescue for financial return .

Try this one too
 

https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/6/20998428/elon-musk-testimony-vernon-unsworth-tweet-honors-agent
 

Quote

Price then went back to Unsworth’s texts. First, we saw one where Unsworth said he’d told film companies to “<deleted> off” for not offering him any money to be interviewed. Then we saw a text where Unsworth called the Thai Navy Seals “kwai,” a Thai word which literally means “buffalo,” but there was some confusion about the slang meaning of the word. It seems to be an insult.

 

21 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Try this one too
 

https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/6/20998428/elon-musk-testimony-vernon-unsworth-tweet-honors-agent
 

 

OMG, Vern swore and he called someone a buffalo , thats terrible .

Yep, that makes Musk not guilty of accusing him on being  Pedo.................