4 ms·

Maybe you missed the part where Musk hired a private investigator to prove that the guy was a pedophile. The investigator lied about the evidence, and Musk did

by kentm 4y ago

Maybe you missed the part where Musk hired a private investigator to prove that the guy was a pedophile. The investigator lied about the evidence, and Musk did no due diligence but directed his PR team to leak those lies to the media, and then threw a hissy fit when the media didn't reprint those lies uncritically. The whole "pedo guy is just a generic insult" is a laughable lie that Musk tried to float in court. The evidence is that Musk tried to ruin a guy because he had the audacity to call out his publicity stunt when directly asked during an interview. You need to stop defending Musk on this because what he did was incredibly dick-headed and vindictive.

stickfigure 4y ago
The investigator lying about evidence is news to me, but hiring an investigator when someone sues you seems perfectly fair game? I mean, if you sued me over something frivolous and I had the resources for it, I'd tear your life apart too. Exchanging insults on twitter is one thing, filing lawsuits is something completely different. Nobody comes across looking pretty here, sure. But it's a real struggle to care one way or another about it. Sounds like that's exactly what the jury thought.
- kentm 4y ago
  Musk hired the investigator before the diver sued. The diver sued because Musk basically said "No it wasn't just an insult, I really believe he's a pedophile and I have evidence" to multiple parties. Musk tried to ruin a guys life because he said that Musk's submarine was a publicity stunt. In no way, shape, or form are what they did equivalent and you have a serious moral deficiency if you think they are. Its incredible to me that anyone would try to draw a moral equivalency here. > Nobody comes across looking pretty here, sure. But it's a real struggle to care one way or another about it. Sounds like that's exactly what the jury thought. The jury found for Musk because Musk didn't name the guy in his tweets. Thats why the diver lost. I don't think you can extrapolate from that verdict to "actually they were both equally bad."

by kentm 4y ago

stickfigure 4y ago

The investigator lying about evidence is news to me, but hiring an investigator when someone sues you seems perfectly fair game? I mean, if you sued me over something frivolous and I had the resources for it, I'd tear your life apart too. Exchanging insults on twitter is one thing, filing lawsuits is something completely different. Nobody comes across looking pretty here, sure. But it's a real struggle to care one way or another about it. Sounds like that's exactly what the jury thought.

kentm 4y ago
Musk hired the investigator before the diver sued. The diver sued because Musk basically said "No it wasn't just an insult, I really believe he's a pedophile and I have evidence" to multiple parties. Musk tried to ruin a guys life because he said that Musk's submarine was a publicity stunt. In no way, shape, or form are what they did equivalent and you have a serious moral deficiency if you think they are. Its incredible to me that anyone would try to draw a moral equivalency here. > Nobody comes across looking pretty here, sure. But it's a real struggle to care one way or another about it. Sounds like that's exactly what the jury thought. The jury found for Musk because Musk didn't name the guy in his tweets. Thats why the diver lost. I don't think you can extrapolate from that verdict to "actually they were both equally bad."