7 ms·
Journalists Trespass, Assault Tesla Employees at the Gigafactory
- bcook 11y agoThe act is closer to that of an "asshole", rather than a journalist. Calls 'em like I sees 'em.
- Others 11y agoWow, what stupid/terrible thing to do. I can't believe someone would seriously think that assaulting Tesla's employees is a good strategy to escape being prosecuted...
- ctdonath 11y agoNeoluddites?
- JustSomeNobody 11y agoJust wondering if those employees will be showcased on www.rgj.Com's local crime mugshot.
- vermontdevil 11y agoOr will they go through the perp walk that the media loves to deploy on others?
- reustle 11y agoInteresting that the 2nd hero story on their front page is about the local Startup Weekend.
- mschuster91 11y agoOkay, I understand "investigative journalism", but a) that's not the definition and b) the driver should face an attempted murder charge. Knowingly running someone over with a vehicle is nothing less.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- aikah 11y ago> in the heat of the moment You mean a "crime of passion" ? good luck with that in a tribunal.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- JoshTriplett 11y agoIf they'd actually killed someone in the course of a felony, that would make it first-degree murder.
- wtallis 11y agoAn attempted second degree murder is still an attempted murder, right?
- mfisher87 11y agoHaving your license plate written down is "heat of the moment"?
- dmayle 11y agoActually, it's not. It's Murder 2, or Murder in the 2nd degree. Premeditation is Murder in the first degree. All that's required for murder is a) intent to harm (not premeditation), and b) death. Given that running over someone kills them, this is definitely attempted 2nd degree murder. Edit: I forgot, intention to commit a felony carries premeditation, so it would even be attempted first degree murder
- sandworm101 11y agoThis is not unusual. Media scrums can be more mosh pit than journalism. There are always a few who act aggressively and have trouble turning that off once things get violent. But I wouldn't absolve tesla. A cop would have been trained not to stand directly behind such a vehicle. Someone will surely look into the actions of these security guards to see if they perhaps went above their duties, or whether deploying security guards to deal with such a vehicle is ever appropriate. There are situations where non-cops are expected to stand aside.
- mschuster91 11y ago> But I wouldn't absolve tesla. A cop would have been trained not to stand directly behind such a vehicle. Nothing, absolutely nothing, allows you to knowingly drive over someone with a vehicle. Except if the other guy has a gun drawn and pointed on you.
- sandworm101 11y agoNot what I was talking about. There are several issues, whether these trespassers committed a crime is just one. This is an on-the-job injury of an employee. Whether anything went wrong on the employer/employee side to contribute to this is a totally different evaluation. Whether these guards had the authority to seize the vehicle is another. The insurance companies that have to pay for the medical care will look into these questions. Note that Tesla is not describing these employees as heroes. Tesla (or whatever company trains/deploys these guards) might be on the hook for substantial costs. No doubt this incident will result in new training and/or a serious rethink of how security guards are deployed in such situations.
- jacquesm 11y ago> whether these trespassers committed a crime is just one. Isn't trespassing already a crime all by itself?
- sandworm101 11y ago
- MBCook 11y agoSaw the headline assumed that it was an overstatement and that reading the article would show that someone just give someone else a little shove or something. After all this is on Teslas website, so you'd expect them to portray the situation the way they want it to be seen. Turns out the title isn't sensational, it probably should be something like "newspaper employees attempt to run over Tesla security guards". They actually UNDERPLAYED it. Did this make any kind of national news? Seems like a pretty good store that you'd expect the media to be repeating. Wow.
- thoman23 11y agoWow indeed. Not once, but twice, intentionally ramming their Jeep into some poor employee. That's sociopathic.
- kafkaesq 11y agoThere's no evidence the ramming was intentional.
- Natsu 11y agoThat's not quite accurate: there were two separate instances where they hit someone with their jeep. Neither account disputes that part of the story. We can reasonably say that the credibility of the accident theory goes down the more accidents one has in a short period of time. That's not to say it couldn't have been an accident, but the very fact that there were two separate incidents is weak evidence against the claim of it being an accident. The bigger problem, though, is that the driver used deadly force to attempt to escape and nobody alleges that Tesla's guards caused any injuries at all to the reporters. The closest allegation is that there was damage to their jeep.
- ethbro 11y agoFrom the RGJ story (http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2015/10/09/rgj-photographer-arrested-after-altercation-withtesla-security-guards/73693850/ http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2015/10/09/rgj-photographer-ar...): "The newspaper’s vehicle was damaged in the altercation. A rock had been used to shatter the driver’s-side window and the driver’s-side seat belt had been cut in half. [Storey County Sheriff] Antinoro said he couldn’t confirm how that damage occurred." To be fair, if I tried to run over someone, I'd expect them to be less than pleased...
- ps4fanboy 11y agohttp://www.rgj.com/story/news/2015/10/09/rgj-photographer-arrested-after-altercation-withtesla-security-guards/73693850/ http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2015/10/09/rgj-photographer-ar...
- phy6 11y ago"Andy Barron was booked on a charge of battery" HAH
- beefsack 11y agoThis is one side of the story, don't forget that.