It didn't ruin the guy's life.
The idea that someone should be liable for an insult is absurd. People insult each other all day, every day.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Elon Musk wins Twitter defamation trial brought by caver Vernon Unsworth
- Thread starter Deleted member 43084
- Start date
It didn't ruin the guy's life.
The idea that someone should be liable for an insult is absurd. People insult each other all day, every day.
The jury full of pedos you mean?
Well its not defamation either way
ugh Pedo isn't an insult people would throw around normally...like wtf kind of weird ass people do you associate with? "Lol Jack is such a Pedo..amirght? hahaha"
That's a serious accusation. Not sure why you can't see that. And also it didn't ruin the guy's life isn't the point, it could have is the point.
OP
OP
Will you give me permission to call you a pedo every time I disagree with you on this forum? In fact, please ask the admins to declare you are fine being called a pedophile
What the hell? Everyone knew who he was talking about. Every news org in the world reported on it. Then Musk deleted his tweets, and why do that if they were so innocent?
No the literal point of a defamation case is that the defamation in question is negatively messing with someone's life to the point where it affects them and their livelihood, which is why there's posts in this very thread calling the plaintiff attorney an idiot for asking for 200 million in damages.
I didn't realize people also hire investigators to spy on someone they called a pedophile to their millions of followers who will believe every word that they say.
Typical me. I'm just completely out of tune with how people act these days.
Ah, so if I were to say "that annoying pedo who owns that electric car company" on social media, I would be in the clear, since I wouldn't mention "anybody" by name?
Good to know.
Defamation laws are not about what 'could' have happened though. You have to prove beyond doubt that it actually did happen to the jury. The prosecution has to argue that his reputation was damaged in some tangible way. This is where I guess defamation gets tough for regular folks to argue. Corporates and such can show sales numbers and trends to indicate a turn in attitudes towards them. For us, we'd have to show some way it effected us directly like getting fired from a job or being refused a service as a piece of solid evidence.
A coworker saying 'Did you just piss yourself in front of all these people' is not enough you'd have to prove you didn't piss yourself, the coworker was trying to make people seriously think you pissed yourself and you got fired from work for pissing yourself which you defo didn't do that one time.
Didn't he hire a private investigator to try and prove that the guy was a pedophile. That just seems insane to me and borderline harassment.
What, exactly, does that have to do with charge in question?
Imagine, we're at a murder trial:
Well he didn't do it, but he did have a doordash vehicle bugged to listen to random conversations.
LOCK HIM UP, CLOSE ENOUGH TO MURDER!!!!
The idea that some billionaire with millions of followers can outright insult someone and ruin his reputation can get away with is is absurd.
This sets a standard for future cases. You can now openly lie on Twitter and ruin someone's life, and I can tell court "Musk v Pedo Guy", and walk away nodding.
Ah yes. This is equivalent to murder, even sarcastically!1!1
No one wants to lock up Elon. More like accountability to people in power harassing people with no power.
He was able to afford a pretty good lawyer that can convince a jury that being a famous person with a platform and throwing around unfounded claims using that that can irreversibly harm someone's life requires no consequences.
Agreed. What a frivolous lawsuit. This was the obvious outcome.
Don't bother with vodalus, who may or may not be okay with being called a pedophile. He's not coming back
The rich dude got away with something...what a fucking shocker! Musk is a cunt. For all that wealth and success, his fragile little ego couldn't stand being told he was wasting everyone's time with his vanity "rescue" idea. The jury are morons if "Well, he didn't name him in the tweet" actually counts as a defence.
Last edited:
I mean, it does, but this is a poor example of that. It's because he's a billionaire that this even went to trial. If it's as your local McDonald's cashier that called that guy a pedo, any attempted case would have probably been thrown out.
I'm going to be an asshole here, but this is by far one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this site.
Part of the case hinged on whether or not Musk sincerely believed Unsworth was a pedophile and whether or not people were convinced by Musk's claims which would make it defamation. Musk literally hired investigators to try and prove his claims as well as shopping around his proof to media outlets to try and push the narrative that Unsworth was a pedophile.
The fact that he can get away with 'IT WAS JUST A JOKE' despite literally and obviously doing everything he could to prove it and make others believe it was true is absurd.
Yeah, its cool. I don't want to fight anyone here over Elon calling someone Pedo and hiding behind his LSD and lawyers.
Did Elon apologize for saying these things publically, in court, in person or over twitter?
Edit: LOL!! Elon's lawyer want the cavediver to apologize instead for talking about his submarine. What a joke.
Last edited:
Insult being protected by the first amendment is certainly not a precedent that's been set recently. That's literally the law. Defamation isn't a protection against insult, it's a protection against those knowingly spreading falsehoods that cause quantifiable damages. It seems damages weren't really proven in this case either.
I'd love to see the jury instructions and what level of evidence that the plaintiff had to meet.
Sort of reminds me when people lost their minds when a Florida jury did not convict Casey Anthony of murdering her children.
Sort of reminds me when people lost their minds when a Florida jury did not convict Casey Anthony of murdering her children.
You can lie on Twitter anyway? We're in political season right now in both the US and UK, people are posting lies non-stop about individuals, especially MPs. Or if it's not lies, it's name-calling of all sorts.
"Ruining someone's life" has to be quantifiable in a court. That's how damages tend to work, if a defamation case is ever to be successful in a situation like this where it's a person vs person. Not say, a person vs a company, or one company vs another company. It's always "easier" cases if you can prove loss of earnings.
People trying to explain things in this topic aren't, for the most part, doing it to defend Elon Musk, they're pointing out that someone being an asshole and massively unliked, is often irrelevant for a jury if it doesn't pertain to the case.
Whereas a lot of the Era response seems to be because Elon Musk is an asshole who behaved like an asshole calling someone a pedo, a court case should have gone against him and if it doesn't it's because everyone is paid off. It's not quite that simple here, and that's largely to do with what the defamation laws currently are, not a conspiracy.
Hiring a PI isn't against the law. It's not borderline invasive. It's a fucking legit business.
The lawsuit was incredibly dumb from the get go. Obvious cash in scheme, but since it was against a wealthy entity, it's awww yeah! Fuck em even if they didn't break a law. As if being successful is a crime.
But yes, please show us all what laws were broken by the actions Musk took in his defense?
It doesn't matter of it's not socially accepted, it's acceptable in the eyes of the court.
the Internet has already exhaustively proven you can call anyone anything without the expectation of facing legal consequences
like, that dead horse was pulverized into something indistinguishable from dirt a long, long time ago
Right, yeah, got it. You're that kind of person. I'll go ahead and bow out of this argument then right now because I can see it's not worth it.
I'm pretty sure you could get away with calling someone a pedo on twitter also.
Pretty ridiculous considering Musk's intent was clearly to damage the diver's character and reputation when all eyes where watching their spat online in light of the actual rescue attempt which is why people were paying attention.
The law is so behind on social media/online communication in the modern age.
The law is so behind on social media/online communication in the modern age.
I dont know how hiring a private investigator to try and prove someone is a pedophile isn't meant to cause harm to someone.
The hard on hate for musk on this board is truly one of the more bizarre things I've seen on the internet.
The other side of this is people like President Donald Trump wanting very lose defamation laws so that he can sue anyone that is critical of him including journalists.
Look up Libel. Libel laws apply. Probably doesn't apply in LA but it applies.
To break down libel's definition: a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
That's what Elon did, right? I'm sure diver asking for $190M is the absurdity that threw this case out of court. But Elon did commit Libel, a written statement damaging the diver's reputation.
Elon literally told the guy to sue him. Literally said "why hasn't he sued me yet?", as a way of saying "I'm right. He's a Pedo. He can't even sue me cause he IS a Pedo."
But no, you got the President being all salty and threatening lawsuits against people who said he committed crimes that he actually did.
Defamation is incredibly difficult to prove under US law, so this doesn't surprise me unfortunately. The guy would literally have to crawling on the streets in rags begging for money and be homeless for him to even have a chance. It's still crazy how Musk got away scot-free despite tripling down on his tweet and hiring a PI to find dirt on him.
And this is the key point that should've buried Musk. It didn't matter that the investigator he hired was a conman who wasted his money. He was deliberately trying to prove this guy was a pedophile.
Knowing the diver is British, he should've sued in UK; Libel laws are more stronger overseas. US don't give a fuck about capitalist billionaires.