Elon is still throwing out pedophile accusations. He has learned nothing.

[OPRCE]

Re, the potential of a libel suit, you do realize that Musk also has an obvious countersuit? Given that Unsworth went on international TV and made the false claim that Musk had been ordered off the dive site, among other things?

1. I don't know whether Mr Musk was ordered off the site or not but would tend to think it not unlikely.

2. Even if the statement were to be proven false, it barely amounts to a libel and will stacks up very low against a false accusation that the opponent is a "child rapist", which is a libel per se, imputing a felony, for which no monetary damage must be shown in order to prevail.

 

[KarenRei]

1. I don't know whether Mr Musk was ordered off the site or not but would tend to think it not unlikely.

Musk presented a letter from the Thai government confirming that he was not requested to leave the site (the Thai government managed the site).

2. Even if the statement were to be proven false, it barely amounts to a libel

An attempt to publicly damage someone's reputation is an attempt to publicly damage someone's reputation

a false accusation that the opponent is a "child rapist"

... which was by definition not libel because it was a private email, with a specific request that it be off the record. Libel requires a statement be publicly published.

And FYI, good luck proving libel on any of Musk's weren't qualified privilege - one category of which is "statements made in self-defense or to warn others about a harm or danger". To overcome a qualified privilege, the person suing for defamation "must prove that the person who made the defamatory statement acted intentionally, recklessly, or with malice, hatred, spite, ill will or resentment". In short, they need to prove that Musk didn't actually believe that Unsworth was a pedophile and a danger to others. Despite the fact that he's been trying - in private letters - to get journalists to investigate him for it.

 

[OPRCE]

Musk presented a letter from the Thai government confirming that he was not requested to leave the site (the Thai government managed the site).



An attempt to publicly damage someone's reputation is an attempt to publicly damage someone's reputation



... which was by definition not libel because it was a private email, with a specific request that it be off the record. Libel requires a statement be publicly published.

And FYI, good luck proving libel on any of Musk's weren't qualified privilege - one category of which is "statements made in self-defense or to warn others about a harm or danger". To overcome a qualified privilege, the person suing for defamation "must prove that the person who made the defamatory statement acted intentionally, recklessly, or with malice, hatred, spite, ill will or resentment". In short, they need to prove that Musk didn't actually believe that Unsworth was a pedophile and a danger to others. Despite the fact that he's been trying - in private letters - to get journalists to investigate him for it.

Re. #1. -- Fair enough

Re. #2 -- Musk certainly published the "child rapist" statement to a journalist, who asserts it was not off the record as he never agreed to that term. In any case, I suspect the claim that publishing to journalists "off the record" means it was somehow not published may not hold up very long in court, but do not know if/where this for me novel legal theorem has been tested.

3. Re. qualified privilege -- If Unsworth sues it will almost certainly be in London, where a rather different version of the law will apply:
English defamation law - Wikipedia

 

[Buggle]

Re. #1. -- Fair enough

Re. #2 -- Musk certainly published the "child rapist" statement to a journalist, who asserts it was never off the record as he never agreed to that term. In any case, I suspect the claim that publishing to journalists "off the record" means it was somehow not published may not hold up very long in court, but do not know if/where this for me novel legal theorem has been tested.

3. If Unsworth sues it will almost certainly be in London, where a rather different version of the law will apply:
English defamation law - Wikipedia

I think that journalist is shiite. He's some low level dude looking for his 15 minutes. Using a technicality to boost his profile. Who would ever expect Elon to be up to speed on the nuance of OTR?

 

[OPRCE]

I think that journalist is shiite. He's some low level dude looking for his 15 minutes. Using a technicality to boost his profile. Who would ever expect Elon to be up to speed on the nuance of OTR?

Not I, for sure, but maybe he should just stop feeding the trolls & shorts then, and hire a competent press officer to handle this kind of stuff?

 

[Buggle]

Not I, for sure, but maybe he should just stop feeding the trolls & shorts then, and hire a competent press officer to handle this kind of stuff?

I think he likes a bit of controversy in his life. Just my opinion.

 

[KarenRei]

"It's easy to demonize people. You're usually wrong about it. People are nicer than you think. Give people more credit." -- Elon Musk's final comment in the Joe Rogan podcast.

 

[neroden]

Worth noting that English defamation judgements aren't enforceable in the US. (Due to England having very low standards for defamation judgements.)

 

[OPRCE]

Worth noting that English defamation judgements aren't enforceable in the US. (Due to England having very low standards for defamation judgements.)

I'm sure the High Court in London can concoct some creative solution to help Mr Unsworth secure his winnings, such as garnishment from the assets of Tesla in UK.

For sure the loudmouth Musk, having muchly shouted that he *really wants* to be sued, cannot then fail to appear, so maybe they will just impound his private jet when he lands, as insurance against him fleeing without settling the bill when he loses.

Where there's a will, there's a way ...

 

[KarenRei]

I'm sure the High Court in London can concoct some creative solution to help Mr Unsworth secure his winnings, such as garnishment from the assets of Tesla in UK.

Because apparently Tesla is the defendant, in your mind? Or is your view that courts can do whatever the heck they want, including taking money from an entity just because a defendant happens to own 20% of it?

 

[OPRCE]

Because apparently Tesla is the defendant, in your mind? Or is your view that courts can do whatever the heck they want, including taking money from an entity just because a defendant happens to own 20% of it?

I never thought Tesla would be a party in the defamation suit, but essentially, yes, am just pointing out that stranger things have happened over there and IMO once getting their teeth in the Old Beaks will have their pound of flesh by hook or by crook.

But don't worry about it ... I am convinced that being properly taken to the cleaners will ultimately be very beneficial for Mr Musk.

 

[KarenRei]

This conversation is just getting silly.

 

[Oldschool496]

Elon knows quite a bit more then we do See below:

Frankly, not sure why he even bothers with this stuff.


Elon Musk tells a reporter to 'stop defending child rapists' as he doubles down on Thai cave rescuer attack


In an e-mail to a BuzzFeed News reporter, Tesla CEO Elon Musk doubled down in his attacks on Vernon Unsworth, the cave diver hailed as a hero in this summer's rescue of a youth soccer team trapped in a cave in Thailand.
“I suggest that you call people you know in Thailand, find out what’s actually going on and stop defending child rapists, you f****** a**hole,” Musk wrote in the email, according to BuzzFeed News. “He’s an old, single white guy from England who’s been traveling to or living in Thailand for 30 to 40 years, mostly Pattaya Beach, until moving to Chiang Rai for a child bride who was about 12 years old at the time," the email continued.
Musk reportedly went further, saying that "I f***** hope" that Unsworth sues him — something that Unsworth has threatened to do, per an earlier BuzzFeed report. In fact, Musk's e-mails to BuzzFeed were sent last week, in response to a request for comment on Unsworth's preparations to sue.
Musk did not provide any evidence for these allegations, according to the BuzzFeed report. Of note is that the e-mail from Musk to BuzzFeed was prefaced with "off the record" — a condition that needs to be agreed upon by both parties.

 

[KarenRei]

Elon knows quite a bit more then we do See below:

Frankly, not sure why he even bothers with this stuff.


Elon Musk tells a reporter to 'stop defending child rapists' as he doubles down on Thai cave rescuer attack


In an e-mail to a BuzzFeed News reporter, Tesla CEO Elon Musk doubled down in his attacks on Vernon Unsworth, the cave diver hailed as a hero in this summer's rescue of a youth soccer team trapped in a cave in Thailand.
“I suggest that you call people you know in Thailand, find out what’s actually going on and stop defending child rapists, you f****** a**hole,” Musk wrote in the email, according to BuzzFeed News. “He’s an old, single white guy from England who’s been traveling to or living in Thailand for 30 to 40 years, mostly Pattaya Beach, until moving to Chiang Rai for a child bride who was about 12 years old at the time," the email continued.
Musk reportedly went further, saying that "I f***** hope" that Unsworth sues him — something that Unsworth has threatened to do, per an earlier BuzzFeed report. In fact, Musk's e-mails to BuzzFeed were sent last week, in response to a request for comment on Unsworth's preparations to sue.
Musk did not provide any evidence for these allegations, according to the BuzzFeed report. Of note is that the e-mail from Musk to BuzzFeed was prefaced with "off the record" — a condition that needs to be agreed upon by both parties.

Written earlier:

I think it's obvious that there's more to Musk's belief (and yes, he clearly does believe what he said about Unsworth) than "google searches". In the email with Buzzfeed (which it should be noted was intended to be off the record, not a public statement), he made some very specific claims, even an age of a supposed child bride. You don't get that from a "google search".

He also mentioned people at the dive site not liking Unsworth. Yet some of the "big names" at the dive site who were asked about him liked him.

Putting two and two together... my theory? I think there was a person at the dive site who didn't like Unsworth, who Musk talked with. A person who badmouthed Unsworth to Musk, and whose badmouthing Musk took as literal and authoritative. It would also explain why Musk keeps telling people to investigate with local sources, but not disclosing where he's getting his (notably specific) information from. The only "evidence" Musk would have to disclose would be to name the person who told him that, and he obviously wouldn't want to do that.

 

[OPRCE]

This conversation is just getting silly.

No, it isn't!

 

[R.S]

This conversation is just getting silly.

True, the consequences any court would impose on Musk are nothing compared to the damage he has done himself already.

Especially at a time where his public image is far from where it once was, this just makes him look petty and unstable.

"It's easy to demonize people. You're usually wrong about it. People are nicer than you think. Give people more credit." -- Elon Musk's final comment in the Joe Rogan podcast.

Maybe we should let him smoke more weed! Finally an Elon quote I can agree with again. Now please let him keep this attitude, or at least when he is using twitter.

 

[Oldschool496]

Written earlier:

Evidently this Unsworth had or has a Facebook account with lots of pics? Either way its not our fight and I hope this all goes away soon and we get onto building cars and doing great things.

 

[KarenRei]

Evidently this Unsworth had or has a Facebook account with lots of pics?

Will people stop repeating this myth?

 

[mos6507]

"It's easy to demonize people. You're usually wrong about it. People are nicer than you think. Give people more credit." -- Elon Musk's final comment in the Joe Rogan podcast.

It's easy to demonize people when you're butthurt over them demeaning your sub as a publicity stunt.

 

[dondy]

Re. #1. -- Fair enough

Re. #2 -- Musk certainly published the "child rapist" statement to a journalist, who asserts it was not off the record as he never agreed to that term. In any case, I suspect the claim that publishing to journalists "off the record" means it was somehow not published may not hold up very long in court, but do not know if/where this for me novel legal theorem has been tested.

3. Re. qualified privilege -- If Unsworth sues it will almost certainly be in London, where a rather different version of the law will apply:
English defamation law - Wikipedia[/QUOTE']Why not in China or Russia?There should be a reason for a case. In this case it's or California or Thailand.