Page 1 of 5
1
2
3
... LastLast
  1. #1

    Elon Musk Defemation Verdict (Not Guilty)

    Well, would you look at that?

    The outcome of this was fairly predictable. He'd had to prove that Elon Musk Tweet not only convinced people that he was a pedophile, but that it did real damage to him financially or personally.

    The worst part about the internet is that it let the truly crazy, racist, and bigots find each other easily.

  2. #2
    What a joke. Didn't Elon Musk double down on his comments and even tried to hire a PI to investigate him?

    If this was a person who couldn't avoid the most expensive lawyers and a PR team, they would've been found guilty.

    You have a legion of zealots following Musk... all parroting that this guy is a kiddy-fiddler. You think there'd be no personal damage from that? LOL. Did you happen to sit on the jury?

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Heidelstein View Post
    What a joke. Didn't Elon Musk double down on his comments and even tried to hire a PI to investigate him?

    If this was a person who couldn't avoid the most expensive lawyers and a PR team, they would've been found guilty.

    You have a legion of zealots following Musk... all parroting that this guy is a kiddy-fiddler. You think there'd be no personal damage from that? LOL. Did you happen to sit on the jury?
    I did not, but it's clear the Jury didn't think so.

    I know defimation is hard to prove even under the best of circumstances in US courts, and a tweet is not one of those cases.
    The worst part about the internet is that it let the truly crazy, racist, and bigots find each other easily.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    I did not, but it's clear the Jury didn't think so.

    I know defimation is hard to prove even under the best of circumstances in US courts, and a tweet is not one of those cases.
    The jury are idiots.

    Perhaps the diver's lawyer was Lionel Hutz, because in this case, he had plenty to go on. Not only this comment came from one of the world's most known businessmen, but the massive following and media attention it was getting would've amplified the comment. Musk claims that it was just some "off the cusp" comment, but that's ridiculous because he doubled down and claimed that because he's an old guy living in Thailand, he must be a kiddy-fiddler. He even had the fellow investigated to try to bring dirt on him ffs. That is NOT simply a little insult or barb.

    Imagine if someone went out of their way to make your life hell like that? Now, amplify it by x1000 because of a massive following and media presence. If I were to do what Musk did to you, I would've been hauled in front of court and found guilty. For sure.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Heidelstein View Post
    The jury are idiots.

    Perhaps the diver's lawyer was Lionel Hutz, because in this case, he had plenty to go on. Not only this comment came from one of the world's most known businessmen, but the massive following and media attention it was getting would've amplified the comment. Musk claims that it was just some "off the cusp" comment, but that's ridiculous because he doubled down and claimed that because he's an old guy living in Thailand, he must be a kiddy-fiddler. He even had the fellow investigated to try to bring dirt on him ffs. That is NOT simply a little insult or barb.

    Imagine if someone went out of their way to make your life hell like that? Now, amplify it by x1000 because of a massive following and media presence. If I were to do what Musk did to you, I would've been hauled in front of court and found guilty. For sure.
    You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt of financial or reputable damage.

    Is he making less money? Do the people he works with and now think he is a pedophile? Those are the sort of things you gotta be able to show in court for a jury to see.

    That's nearly impossible to prove over a tweet. You also have to think about legal precedent. We sue each other already over the dumbest thing. Over a tweet would be a new low.
    Last edited by Jettisawn; 2019-12-07 at 02:56 AM.
    The worst part about the internet is that it let the truly crazy, racist, and bigots find each other easily.

  6. #6
    I would've thought a high profile figure calling someone a pedophile on social media, then accusing them of other things after deleting their initial tweet, was as cut and dry as you could get?

    Elon Musk also called him a child rapist, so I don't particularly think this was just one isolated little insult. Hope the guy appeals.

  7. #7
    The Unstoppable Force
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    23,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt of financial or reputable damage.

    Is he making less money? Do people he works with and knows now think he is a pedophie? Those are the sort of things you gotta be able to be able to show in court for a jury to see.

    That's nearly impossible to prove over a tweet. You also have to think about legal precedent. We sue eachtoher already over the dumbest thing. Over a tweet would be a new low.
    Ah, so defamation is perfectly fine as long as you do it via tweet.

  8. #8
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,091
    Quote Originally Posted by Fargus View Post
    I would've thought a high profile figure calling someone a pedophile on social media, then accusing them of other things after deleting their initial tweet, was as cut and dry as you could get?

    Elon Musk also called him a child rapist, so I don't particularly think this was just one isolated little insult. Hope the guy appeals.
    Public opinion is what matters here, not one rich dude. Cut and dry would be this guy losing his job over that tweet because a significant number of people now think he's a pedophile. That did not happen, and I don't think anyone believed Musk when he tweeted about this.

    People can call each other all the names they want. It only matters, as others have pointed out, if it leads to personal or financial harm.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrt View Post
    Ah, so defamation is perfectly fine as long as you do it via tweet.
    This is freedom of speech, not defamation. We should all be happy that we can live in a society where we can call someone a pedo on the internet and not get thrown in jail.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Underverse View Post
    This is freedom of speech, not defamation. We should all be happy that we can live in a society where we can call someone a pedo on the internet and not get thrown in jail.
    Defamation isn't a criminal offense this was a civil case so there was no risk of Musk being thrown in jail.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Underverse View Post
    Public opinion is what matters here, not one rich dude. Cut and dry would be this guy losing his job over that tweet because a significant number of people now think he's a pedophile. That did not happen, and I don't think anyone believed Musk when he tweeted about this.

    People can call each other all the names they want. It only matters, as others have pointed out, if it leads to personal or financial harm.
    You'd have to be either terribly naive or stupid to think there'd be no personal harm involved here when you consider the amount of media attention this was getting, coupled by the fact it was done by someone with an incredibly high profile and the huge number of followers that would believe every breath that comes from Musk's mouth.

    This isn't simply just a case of someone calling people names on twitter, as the article I linked earlier shows. He even hired someone to dig stuff up on him. That suggests to me he's trying to make someone's life a living hell just because his ego is too big to accept that not everyone is going to agree with his spontaneous ideas (that sub was ridiculous).

  11. #11
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,091
    Quote Originally Posted by pathora44 View Post
    Defamation isn't a criminal offense this was a civil case so there was no risk of Musk being thrown in jail.
    Yeah you're right, although a $190M payout isn't much different. It was more to illustrate the point but I should have chosen my words more carefully.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Fargus View Post
    You'd have to be either terribly naive or stupid to think there'd be no personal harm involved here when you consider the amount of media attention this was getting, coupled by the fact it was done by someone with an incredibly high profile and the huge number of followers that would believe every breath that comes from Musk's mouth.

    This isn't simply just a case of someone calling people names on twitter, as the article I linked earlier shows. He even hired someone to dig stuff up on him. That suggests to me he's trying to make someone's life a living hell just because his ego is too big to accept that not everyone is going to agree with his spontaneous ideas (that sub was ridiculous).
    The jury, which saw all the evidence, disagrees. Having not seen the evidence I can't say either way whether there was actually personal harm involved, but it seems like the guy kept his job and wasn't attacked, so that's a pretty good start towards an indication that there wasn't any real harm.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt of financial or reputable damage.
    Really?

    I didn't realise this was a murder case. Aren't civil cases governed with a lower burden of proof?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Underverse View Post
    The jury, which saw all the evidence, disagrees. Having not seen the evidence I can't say either way whether there was actually personal harm involved, but it seems like the guy kept his job and wasn't attacked, so that's a pretty good start towards an indication that there wasn't any real harm.
    He runs his own business IIRC.

    Losing the case would just make him look like that what Musk said was true, which might impact his business. Something which he might use if he appeals.

    Yeah you're right, although a $190M payout isn't much different.
    Where's that figure come from? The diver initially wanted to settle for $75k.

  13. #13
    The Unstoppable Force
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    23,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Heidelstein View Post
    Really?

    I didn't realise this was a murder case. Aren't civil cases governed with a lower burden of proof?
    Yes, civil cases have a lower burden of proof.

  14. #14
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,091
    Quote Originally Posted by Heidelstein View Post
    Really?

    I didn't realise this was a murder case. Aren't civil cases governed with a lower burden of proof?

    - - - Updated - - -


    He runs his own business IIRC.

    Losing the case would just make him look like that what Musk said was true, which might impact his business. Something which he might use if he appeals.


    Where's that figure come from? The diver initially wanted to settle for $75k.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50694074

  15. #15
    Free Cybertrucks for all on Jury! \o/

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Heidelstein View Post
    Really?

    I didn't realise this was a murder case. Aren't civil cases governed with a lower burden of proof?

    - - - Updated - - -


    He runs his own business IIRC.

    Losing the case would just make him look like that what Musk said was true, which might impact his business. Something which he might use if he appeals.


    Where's that figure come from? The diver initially wanted to settle for $75k.
    if a judge allowed someone to appeal on the basis that him losing his first attempt in court is what caused harm to his reputation, that would be absurd.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by zhero View Post
    if a judge allowed someone to appeal on the basis that him losing his first attempt in court is what caused harm to his reputation, that would be absurd.
    Nah, it was Musk's comments that did that. This decision would've made it worse, but generally appeals will attack any sort of error or law, the weight of the evidence, etc.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Underverse View Post
    Well fuck, that guy shot himself in the foot listening to Lionel Hutz.

    Should've stuck with his initial $75k in damages.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Heidelstein View Post
    Really?

    I didn't realise this was a murder case. Aren't civil cases governed with a lower burden of proof?

    - - - Updated - - -


    He runs his own business IIRC.

    Losing the case would just make him look like that what Musk said was true, which might impact his business. Something which he might use if he appeals.


    Where's that figure come from? The diver initially wanted to settle for $75k.
    You are correct, my point was that you have to prove to a jury that the person's words has caused real harm. It tends to be financially. That's a hard thing to prove.

    You can lose business for a number of other reasons than someone's mean tweet, and him losing business over a court case he lost because of a tweet doesn't make it any better. That would have been his own fault for trying to become a multi-millionaire over a tweet. Which was all he was really trying to do? (IMO) Anyone who thinks otherwise has a lot more faith in the human condition than they should.

    You can't just sue someone because they told a lie about you. That isn't enough and if it was courtrooms would be filled with a lot more frivolous lawsuits. I saw this outcome coming as soon as I first heard about the lawsuit. A lot more powerful and rich people have tried to sue for defamation and lost with more evidence than a tweet.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrt View Post
    Ah, so defamation is perfectly fine as long as you do it via tweet.
    Love how people just read into what people are saying and think and say it as if it's an intelligent response.

    More like, Defamation is really hard to prove and even harder when your key evidence is only a tweet.
    The worst part about the internet is that it let the truly crazy, racist, and bigots find each other easily.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    Love how people just read into what people are saying and think and say it as if it's an intelligent response.

    More like, Defamation is really hard to prove and even harder when your key evidence is only a tweet.





    He also paid $50,000 for a PI. Apparently the jury thought it was just an insult. Right.
    Last edited by Fargus; 2019-12-07 at 04:33 AM.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Underverse View Post
    This is freedom of speech, not defamation. We should all be happy that we can live in a society where we can call someone a pedo on the internet and not get thrown in jail.
    Interesting that you mentioned "on the internet" in your statement. What do you think should happen to this person if it happened in real life in front of his peers?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •