I'm sure they will and likely will get more details than we'll ever get. Unless she decides to go public we'll never know what happened.
Motorsport Off Topic Thread
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
I'm sure they will and likely will get more details than we'll ever get. Unless she decides to go public we'll never know what happened.
At this point would she have had to sign anything to say she won’t do things like that? From the sounds of things it was dismissed rather than an agreement being met. So she’s free to appeal or take other routes right?
This isn’t going anywhere anytime soon is it.. lol
I was wondering the same thing earlier, no idea.
As far as I'm concerned it's over, unless there's an appeal.
"We investigated ourselves, and found we did nothing wrong"
Except that's not what happened, they bought in an external Barrister to perform the investigation.
But on the flip side, Horner could have actually kept Kate Middleton in his basement for the last 3 months and Red Bull management would have likely protected him and found he had done nothing wrong. Horner basically is Red Bull management/top brass at this stage.
Wasn't it an independent investigator brought in?
I find the whole thing bizarre tbh, why make press statements (seems like the leaks were very carefully coordinated) and not release what the allegations are. To this day there seems to be an awful lot of noise about nothing, there is little bits of information here and there but nothing really concrete, all we really know it was a female member of staff that made an allegation. Some report it as sexual, others as controlling and cohesive behaviour.
Ford have made statements regarding the lack of information and the potential harm to the brand. Just seems a bit odd.
Is it all fake and brought on by Marko to bring Horner downs peg and remember his station, apparently the other major shareholder doesnt feel the same as Marko and wants to keep Christian, and as he has the lions share of the shares he has the controlling say (apparently according to some news outlets).
But it's all up in the air as to what exactly the truth is.
Bit of a shambles from red bull tbh
Not only did they appoint external company, the investigation was also run by the parent company. Without it being serious enough to get police involved you can't really get more impartial then that.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 16 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 8,724
- Location
- Edinburgh
Apparently despite only owning 49% of Red Bull Dietrich Mateschitz had an agreement with the Thai owners (51% of Red Bull) that he had control and called the shots, etc - that seems to have worked well for the Red Bull company as a whole over the last 30 years!
But that deal didn't persist following the death of Mateschitz so the Thai side are for the first time in a long time actually calling the shots now.
I suspect there's some truth to the power-struggle stuff although given the success it seems a bit stupid to try and force the boss; if a football team tried to do it they would be laughed out of the room by their fans.
But yes an independent investigator (A UK KC I understand) carried out the investigation, surely it doesn't get much more independent than that?
Last edited:
Sending d**k pics to Toto every time Max wins.
I think it means that the accusers name will be dirt in the paddock now. F1 is a tiny community and everyone knows everyone else.
Those that think some shadey deal has been done, this would have to include Ford. Not a hope Ford would risk their reputation attemping to save Horner.
Neither would Red Bull if you think about it. Is Horner more important than the reputation of Red Bull?
Hush money or not, you're taking a huge chance the accuser doesn't spill the beans.
Neither would Red Bull if you think about it. Is Horner more important than the reputation of Red Bull?
Hush money or not, you're taking a huge chance the accuser doesn't spill the beans.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 10,141
- Location
- Europe
Not really. Just like if you get involved in an incident at work. It's not like if I call up your work they spill the beans for me to post on my website. Why just to any conclusions?
They didnt though....
To be honest the whole exercise wasn't really going to satisfy anyone. The alleged "100% independent investigation" was funded by Red Bull and it doesn't matter whether it was funded by the parent company, the motorsport arm or Christian himself, it isn't by it's nature 100% impartial, purely because the respective parts of Red Bull have their vested interests, whether that is for or against him. And if anything thinks that because an investigator is declared "independent", that there isn't a raft of nuance to play with, is either incredibly naive and/or has never worked for a big corporation before.
I thought this, but upon reflection it doesn't matter - it would only further air dirty linen in public and even if it put him in a better light, the result for RB would be a net negative.
Of course no one is entitled to it, but one could argue as above that if they were going for maximum transparency, it could be released in redacted form. In reality it never would be. Even if it shed him in a very good light, it would be more for naysayers to go on and further damage the reputation of the business.
I have no idea whether the claim has any truth to it, and we'll probably never know. If I were the employee in question, and the accusations had base, you wouldn't even look at the "appeal" that RB's statement mentions as it would be largely pointless. You'd get legal advice if not already, and assuming they have left the business, take the legal route and go to an employment tribunal as it's literally the most impartial you're gonna get.
In reality I doubt that will happen, realistically if the process hasn't burnt the accuser out and they give up, and they start the legal route, they'll probably get paid to go away quietly "on no admission of guilt".
I thought this, but upon reflection it doesn't matter - it would only further air dirty linen in public and even if it put him in a better light, the result for RB would be a net negative.
Of course no one is entitled to it, but one could argue as above that if they were going for maximum transparency, it could be released in redacted form. In reality it never would be. Even if it shed him in a very good light, it would be more for naysayers to go on and further damage the reputation of the business.
I have no idea whether the claim has any truth to it, and we'll probably never know. If I were the employee in question, and the accusations had base, you wouldn't even look at the "appeal" that RB's statement mentions as it would be largely pointless. You'd get legal advice if not already, and assuming they have left the business, take the legal route and go to an employment tribunal as it's literally the most impartial you're gonna get.
In reality I doubt that will happen, realistically if the process hasn't burnt the accuser out and they give up, and they start the legal route, they'll probably get paid to go away quietly "on no admission of guilt".
The reason to appeal would be to show an external legal tribunal that you have exhausted all avenues with the company internally.
If there is no appeal then it is either not justified or the complainant has been persuaded to go away.
So either way looks dodgy as hell to me, they spent a long time looking at a none case. If I was a complainant and was offered enough money I would take it, they would be set up for life, obviously 650k if genuine would have been the opening gambit.
If there is no appeal then it is either not justified or the complainant has been persuaded to go away.
So either way looks dodgy as hell to me, they spent a long time looking at a none case. If I was a complainant and was offered enough money I would take it, they would be set up for life, obviously 650k if genuine would have been the opening gambit.
It won't go away for a while because there's a whole of range of possible scenarios that could lead to the outcome we've seen and people will all have their own opinions on the likelihood of where reality lies between "it was all made up and there's nothing more to see" through to "it was all true and is being covered up". People's views may be further swayed if either of the parties pursues any further action but as it stands I expect a lot of people will be thinking along the lines of "something happened but maybe it wasn't as serious as it was rumoured to be"