British caver says he approached by U.S., British lawyers over Musk's comments

[Shiver]

7 minutes ago, dufusdonald said:

Why would the US taxpayers be footing the bill?

A lot of the money invested in Tesla comes from the U.S. government.

[NanLaew]

6 minutes ago, Confuscious said:

... After all, it would not be the first time that evidence of being a pedofile is found in a search on his hard-disk. ...

Confucius would say don't talk so irresponsibly on Thai media.

[Dustdevil]

5 hours ago, rwdrwdrwd said:

Go with the US ones, they will sting him a lot harder, half a million US is the going rate for libel, and that's without a gobby unlikeable billionaire being involved.

It's more difficult to win a slander case in the United States than in Britain, where defendants (last I knew--see the film and book "Denial") in defamation suits are guilty until proven innocent. In the U.S., the First Amendment protects the public from defamation suits by public figures. They have to prove actual malice, reckless disregard for the truth, and that the plaintiff's reputation has actually been damaged. hard to prove. This is why Trump has made a career of threatening libel and slander suits but has rarely if ever gone through with one, and certainly hasn't won any. In our case here, the potential defendant Musk is the public figure, but it seems to me a an uphill battle to prove actual malice, reckless disregard for the truth and actual reputational damage. The man had better file suit in Britain.

[sanemax]

7 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Nobody has said he has for gods sake try and keep up

If you follow the discussion , you will see that I was replying to a post that stated that the allegations had been refuted and I was stating that only Musk can refute the claims that he made and thats something that he hasnt done .

   Its you who needs to keep up and follow the discussion 

[todlad]

25 minutes ago, dufusdonald said:

yadee yada yada. you said Tesla would melt down over this squabble. no it won't. If it would have it would have yesterday like Facebook at first.  FB dropped to $149 and now look at it a month later. 

Still waiting for you to quote me, dufus ... got to go offline for a few hours but looking forward to your further insights when I get back.

 

You could always hold up your hand to your mistake, too: always an option!

[dufusdonald]

3 minutes ago, Shiver said:

A lot of the money invested in Tesla comes from the U.S. government.

Geez, you think the money would come from Tesla?  It would come from Musk's personal funds.  

[Dustdevil]

None of the posters has a remote clue as to how defamation law in the U.S. works. See my comment again: It's more difficult to win a slander case in the United States than in Britain, where defendants (last I knew--see the film and book "Denial") in defamation suits are guilty until proven innocent. In the U.S., the First Amendment protects the public from defamation suits by public figures. They have to prove actual malice, reckless disregard for the truth, and that the plaintiff's reputation has actually been damaged. hard to prove. This is why Trump has made a career of threatening libel and slander suits but has rarely if ever gone through with one, and certainly hasn't won any. In our case here, the potential defendant Musk is the public figure, but it seems to me a an uphill battle to prove actual malice, reckless disregard for the truth and actual reputational damage. The man had better file suit in Britain.

[hashmodha]

5 hours ago, rwdrwdrwd said:

Go with the US ones, they will sting him a lot harder, half a million US is the going rate for libel, and that's without a gobby unlikeable billionaire being involved.

Mitigating circumstances of which there so many here,and punitive damages using the Lawyers who specialise in these libel cases...can be worth much more.........Go for it Vern.....then get a new pair of boots.  He he!

 

5 hours ago, rwdrwdrwd said:

 

 

[JLCrab]

Under California libel law, Mr. Unsworth could likely be considered as a public figure due to his appearance on CNN and in other media being germane to this specific case and it would be HE who would then be required to prove malice -- in the legal sense -- on the part of Mr. Musk.

[oldlakey]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

If you follow the discussion , you will see that I was replying to a post that stated that the allegations had been refuted and I was stating that only Musk can refute the claims that he made and thats something that he hasnt done .

   Its you who needs to keep up and follow the discussion 

You were replying to a post that you did not understand for whatever reason my man

The post clearly made the point as to who had refuted what

Go back and reread what was posted then you will see you are barking up the wrong tree

On the other hand you can continue in this vein its all good entertainment

Have a nice day

[dufusdonald]

2 minutes ago, Dustdevil said:

None of the posters has a remote clue as to how defamation law in the U.S. works. See my comment again: It's more difficult to win a slander case in the United States than in Britain, where defendants (last I knew--see the film and book "Denial") in defamation suits are guilty until proven innocent. In the U.S., the First Amendment protects the public from defamation suits by public figures. They have to prove actual malice, reckless disregard for the truth, and that the plaintiff's reputation has actually been damaged. hard to prove. This is why Trump has made a career of threatening libel and slander suits but has rarely if ever gone through with one, and certainly hasn't won any. In our case here, the potential defendant Musk is the public figure, but it seems to me a an uphill battle to prove actual malice, reckless disregard for the truth and actual reputational damage. The man had better file suit in Britain.

Sure are a lot of idiot posters here. Not sure how many Pedos.  And the guy would probably have to file in US as that is where the tweet came from.  Not a lawyer but fairly certain.

[BestB]

Here is the thing that all of you seem to have missed.

 

Musk did not say peadophile , he said a “pedo” which all assumed meant peadophile, however should it hit the courts with lawyers Musk can afford, “pedo” will have dozens of different meanings, including misspells 

[oldlakey]

9 minutes ago, sanemax said:

If you follow the discussion , you will see that I was replying to a post that stated that the allegations had been refuted and I was stating that only Musk can refute the claims that he made and thats something that he hasnt done .

   Its you who needs to keep up and follow the discussion 

Only MUSK can refute the claims he has made, really

I think you mean only MUSK can withdraw the claims he has made

[theguyfromanotherforum]

Personally, I think she should sue the pants out of Musk.

 

If you are so naive to think that this comment from Musk has no weight to someone's integrity I challenge you to post the same comment to another poster on this very forum. I am sure you will be permanently banned just for tarnishing the poster's username. 

[oldlakey]

3 minutes ago, BestB said:

Here is the thing that all of you seem to have missed.

 

Musk did not say peadophile , he said a “pedo” which all assumed meant peadophile, however should it hit the courts with lawyers Musk can afford, “pedo” will have dozens of different meanings, including misspells 

Never get away with it

[JLCrab]

6 minutes ago, dufusdonald said:

Sure are a lot of idiot posters here. Not sure how many Pedos.  And the guy would probably have to file in US as that is where the tweet came from.  Not a lawyer but fairly certain.

That's funny -- what if he wasn't even in the USA on the day those tweets were made?

[meechai]

Of course the ambulance chasers are up his butt.... Rich target

 

But really more frivolous lawsuits this world does not need.

Like kids on a playground

 

Well he called me a pedo

Yeah but he said stick my toy sub up my bum first

 

Grow up

[dufusdonald]

7 minutes ago, BestB said:

Here is the thing that all of you seem to have missed.

 

Musk did not say peadophile , he said a “pedo” which all assumed meant peadophile, however should it hit the courts with lawyers Musk can afford, “pedo” will have dozens of different meanings, including misspells 

"pretty emphatically dick oriented" (PEDO)

[JLCrab]

2 minutes ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

Personally, I think she should sue the pants out of Musk.

 

If you are so naive to think that this comment from Musk has no weight to someone's integrity I challenge you to post the same comment to another poster on this very forum. I am sure you will be permanently banned just for tarnishing the poster's username. 

'Sue the pants' -- is that a legal term? States in the US do have libel laws and precedents as to what can be claimed and as to how those claims have been decided in courts.

[dufusdonald]

5 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

That's funny -- what if he wasn't even in the USA on the day those tweets were made?

Well using common sense I imagine you have to file where the criminal/civil act took place. I could be dead wrong. 

[kannot]

25 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

And none of that makes any difference unless it came to picking a jury.

and they all worked in a circus?

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Only MUSK can refute the claims he has made, really

I think you mean only MUSK can withdraw the claims he has made

Although "withdraw" would be the better word , "refute" is still acceptable .

But lets not get into the meaning of words , as you know very well what I meant

*Refute :to say or prove that a person, statement, opinion, etc. is wrong or false?

[dufusdonald]

3 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

'Sue the pants' -- is that a legal term? States in the US do have libel laws and precedents as to what can be claimed and as to how those claims have been decided in courts.

You might get banned from TV but how the hell can one tarnish a username?  lol  

[NanLaew]

3 minutes ago, dufusdonald said:

You might get banned from TV but how the hell can one tarnish a username?  lol  

Usually by posting sh!te. It works for me.

[JLCrab]

4 minutes ago, dufusdonald said:

Well using common sense I imagine you have to file where the criminal/civil act took place. I could be dead wrong.

Well that's just it -- he's a guy with a private jet who was in Thailand just a few days before. It wouldn't be hard to establish where he was but he might have not yet made it back to the US on 16 (?) JULY when he made those tweets.

[dufusdonald]

2 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Usually by posting sh!te. It works for me.

If TV banned everyone who posted <deleted> 90% of the posters would be gone. It's raining here.  This is a comedy show from uninformed Pedos.

[dufusdonald]

Just now, dufusdonald said:

If TV banned everyone who posted <deleted> 90% of the posters would be gone. It's raining here.  This is a comedy show from uninformed Pedos.

You use the word sh.. and there it is. I use it and it gets deleted. Go figure.

[toofarnorth]

2 hours ago, jobsworth said:

A police officer in the Chiang Rai, where Unsworth has lived for seven years, said that no charges or complaints had ever been filed against Unsworth. The officer declined to be named because he was not authorised to speak to the media.

 

i would not worry about the police.

i would worry about the ngo's who might add your photo to the international list of pedos. never mind that you have never done anything like that.

 

I am having a similar thought to your last paragraph.

 

If Musk is publicly found guilty to his comment to Vern he has the power to send someone to C/Rai to see where Vern eats/drinks then give a local kid a 1000B to go up to Vern and plant a kiss on him ( just a horrid example ) while another kid takes a photo then it starts all over again.  Nasty thought but I would not put it past Musk to try and clear his name.

[sanemax]

23 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

You were replying to a post that you did not understand for whatever reason my man

The post clearly made the point as to who had refuted what

Go back and reread what was posted then you will see you are barking up the wrong tree

On the other hand you can continue in this vein its all good entertainment

Have a nice day

Go back to post # 41 and take it from there .

 

[Superlight]

2 hours ago, bluesofa said:

Apparently Vern Unsworth is taking advice from the British law firm Grabbit & Run, his contact there being Sue Ellen.

 

Snatch Grabbit and Runne...........very 60's Private Eye