If that’s true then RB are caught in a downright lie. He’d be the polar opposite of independent lol. So you have an online source, surprised more is not made of this although I see in their print version they profiled the lawyer.
Motorsport Off Topic Thread
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
I think it's technically correct.
The barrister is independent of Red Bull Racing. The kind of slimy wiggle room they seem to be seeking throughout this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 21,281
- Location
- North Yorkshire
This is the gift, that keeps on giving. Someone has a massive axe to grind with Horner, drip feeding info and just before race weekends. 
I feel like they will do whatever makes the most money. Which is probably keep them separate with the occasional crossover with the intent of being able to make more money. Not that I'm cynical or anything...
Yes.
This makes me think of things like getting them to qualify on MotoGP bikes then race in F1 cars. Or maybe they have a guest racer weekend where the MotoGP leader gets given the Red Bull.
They have to distract themselves because of how poor Merc and Lewis are doing.
As stated, only those with some kind of a psychotic obsession with RB. I wonder who that could be?
But we also know where that person will go with this discussion
A lot will be because they are massively successful. However there is a large chunk they bring on themselves with their staff...
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,864
- Location
- Location, Location!
So?
So calling him independent is highly misleading if he's the legal representative of the Yoovidhya family who support Horner.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,864
- Location
- Location, Location!
I mean perhaps, but only if you can be certain that the Thai owners are biased towards finding Horner innocent, do you have proof of that?. The fact they choose to do a full on investigation when I don't believe they had to shows they've taken this pretty seriously no?
Them using their own lawyer who is not involved with the Red Bull Racing aspect of the company seem fairly logical, they would need someone they can trust with sensitive internal private information, especially given the leaks that we have allegedly seen come from this already.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 21,281
- Location
- North Yorkshire
Commercial and from an internal trust perspective sure.
From a PR perspective and integrity perspective less so. Calling him independent even less so.
Indeed. Dismissing people's hatred of RB as "because they are successful" is just misdirection. There was plenty to dislike about them even before 2021. But we don't need to go down that topic again, clearly.
Like, a lawyer perhaps?
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,864
- Location
- Location, Location!
Explain the leaks then??? They can only come from someone internal, so this is pretty much sound logic for getting people involved that you trust surely. Even you can comprehend that Scam.Indeed. Dismissing people's hatred of RB as "because they are successful" is just misdirection. There was plenty to dislike about them even before 2021. But we don't need to go down that topic again, clearly.
Like, a lawyer perhaps?
Hand picking an internal friend, instead of choosing an external specialist, suggests that they did not actually want a "full on investigation" since it's exactly what you'd do if you wanted someone to conduct a posterior covering exercise instead of someone likely to properly investigate.
It seems weird to believe that internal leaks are a good reason for not involving one of the many external outfits of good reputation whose future business relies on their proper handling of confidential details.
At the end of the day if true it was just plain stupid, if not stupid then it was for a reason.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 3,332
- Location
- The South
However you look at it, it adds doubt to the 'independent investigation' that was touted by Red Bull as it opens the possibility that the conclusion of the investigation was biased given the connection between the lawyer/"investigator" and Red Bull (regardless of nth degrees of separation).
If it is true, and granted that is a big if, then it seems a bit of a rookie error from Red Bull as i would have thought any potential of doubt in the conclusion would open Red Bull to be challenged on the investigation especially from the likes of the claimant - don't hold me to that, i'm not a solicitor.
Just scroll on by if this topic is uneasy for you; folk are going to discuss this regardless of your supposed boredom given it's in the news
Edit - F1 Insider but interesting article (in German) - Red Bull: Do the Austrians give up because of Horner?
Last edited:
Rather patronising, it's been done to death and on several occasions the mods have stepped to bring it to halt because no-one is quoting facts, just making it up as they go along. I'm rather hoping the mods will clamp down again.However you look at it, it adds doubt to the 'independent investigation' that was touted by Red Bull as it opens the possibility that the conclusion of the investigation was biased given the connection between the lawyer/"investigator" and Red Bull (regardless of nth degrees of separation).
If it is true, and granted that is a big if, then it seems a bit of a rookie error from Red Bull as i would have thought any potential of doubt in the conclusion would open Red Bull to be challenged on the investigation especially from the likes of the claimant - don't hold me to that, i'm not a solicitor.
Just scroll on by if this topic is uneasy for you; folk are going to discuss this regardless of your supposed boredom given it's in the news
To suggest this barrister might be corrupt based upon an article that will quickly become tomorrow's food wrapper and with no actual evidence is a utter travesty.
Last edited: