Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Squeezing into a Thai boys hole.


Recommended Posts

A few points

 

1:The mini-submarine

It isn't a mini sub. Its a metal tube, you shove a kid inside in a scuba mask and oxygen tanks are fitted to it. Its shit. And not suitable for any cave diving. He imposed himself on the rescues site and was removed

 

2:The guy he attacked

When looking for the kids the Thai Navy seals backed out and stated that they could not do the dive because they are not skilled in that type of diving. The first batch of divers who went in backed out because it was too dangerous. Unsworth,  Stanton and Volanthen all went into the cave and risked their own lives searching for strangers.

 

3:Elon Musk is clearly a pitiful cunt of a manchild in the body of a middle aged man

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • 11 months later...
1 minute ago, Rico1304 said:

It shouldn’t make the slightest difference.  Doesn’t the jury decide damages anyway? Not 100% sure but think that’s how it works over there.  

Not sure how it works in the US but it's all a bit weird. Look at OJ the court of law didn't convict him but he was still successful sued for murder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Lee909 said:

Not sure how it works in the US but it's all a bit weird. Look at OJ the court of law didn't convict him but he was still successful sued for murder. 

Lower burden of in civil law, beyond reasonable doubt v balance of probabilities. Plus, people knew about tricks like getting OJ stopping taking his medication so his hands swelled and the glove didn’t fit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Musk's defence team referred to something called "JDART" as a means with which to legitimise such behaviour.

 

Joke that was badly received, therefore

Deleted with an

Apology, and then

Responsive Tweets to move on from the matter.

 

Apparently, "pedo guy" is a normal phrase in South Africa. I highly doubt it's used as a joking reference, and it's unlikely to be seen as a joke by whoever is called that.

 

The cave diver was asking for a ridiculous sum in damages which is probably the main reason his claim had to be thrown out. It would have set a very complicated precident otherwise. Had it been a much lesser sum, he may well have won the case or Musk may have settled out of court.

 

The social media platforms don't care as they get more traffic this way, but for society it would be infinitely better to teach people not to say shit that they'll need to apologise for. In this information age, claiming ignorance should be no defence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Trumo said:

Musk's defence team referred to something called "JDART" as a means with which to legitimise such behaviour.

 

Joke that was badly received, therefore

Deleted with an

Apology, and then

Responsive Tweets to move on from the matter.

 

Apparently, "pedo guy" is a normal phrase in South Africa. I highly doubt it's used as a joking reference, and it's unlikely to be seen as a joke by whoever is called that.

 

The cave diver was asking for a ridiculous sum in damages which is probably the main reason his claim had to be thrown out. It would have set a very complicated precident otherwise. Had it been a much lesser sum, he may well have won the case or Musk may have settled out of court.

 

The social media platforms don't care as they get more traffic this way, but for society it would be infinitely better to teach people not to say shit that they'll need to apologise for. In this information age, claiming ignorance should be no defence.

I’m not sure you are right on that, the argument was 1st amendment. The damages are set by jury so asking for £190m means nothing.  They can find in your favour and give you $1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...