Motorsport Off Topic Thread

Kenai said:
As your own personal opinion on it, do you think it's more likely they're genuine or fabricated?

Personally, I think they're probably genuine - there's too much resigned acceptance of their existence, no challenge or question being made towards their legitimacy and ultimately they just don't seem bad enough to have been worth faking in the first place. If you're going to take a chance on faking stuff like this, why go for such a damp squib?
Click to expand...
Probably real given then sheer volume, but I work in tech/data/software so it also wouldn't surprise me if they were fake (would take a fair amount of effort).

That being said, I'm not going to get my knickers in a knot and threaten to set one of his horses on fire when it hasn't come from a reliable source. Pretty sure we'll know with time.
 
To be fair to them, Red Bull have been even more 'Red Bull' about this whole affair than anyone had given them credit for. lol. Nuts.
 
Interesting development, I don't think RB would get way with suspending someone without good reason, indeed I was pretty surprised Horner wasn't suspended while he was under investigation.
 
chrismscotland said:
Interesting development, I don't think RB would get way with suspending someone without good reason, indeed I was pretty surprised Horner wasn't suspended while he was under investigation.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. What happens if she leaked that data? That would warrant a suspension. For example, if the leak came from her, it could have broken data protection laws.
 
Blackvault said:
That's a good point. What happens if she leaked that data? That would warrant a suspension. For example, if the leak came from her, it could have broken data protection laws.
Click to expand...

Even in Austria, I believe there is no data protection law involved in reproducing a message you were sent. At worst, Horner could claim that she violated the copyright on his pinky photo. But, if she was behind the leak - which personally I doubt - then that would probably be grounds for suspension/termination under "bringing the company into disrepute" clauses. I wonder whether Austria has any laws protecting whistleblowers, and whether she'd fall under them.

Regardless, this doesn't seem like a particularly good PR move from Red Bull.
 
Mr Jack said:
Even in Austria, I believe there is no data protection law involved in reproducing a message you were sent. At worst, Horner could claim that she violated the copyright on his pinky photo. But, if she was behind the leak - which personally I doubt - then that would probably be grounds for suspension/termination under "bringing the company into disrepute" clauses. I wonder whether Austria has any laws protecting whistleblowers, and whether she'd fall under them.

Regardless, this doesn't seem like a particularly good PR move from Red Bull.
Click to expand...
She could be employed by Red Bull Racing Limited, who are registered in the UK. Would the photos still break data protection laws?
 
MissChief said:
We now live in a world where the CEO of your company can send you a text message admitting he rubbed one out over you and YOU are the one suspended while he gets away scot-free. Wild.
Click to expand...
Or we are living in a world where dishonest people can make accusations against someone, fabricate evidence then get caught out.
The BBC has quoted Red Bull in that the individual has been suspended because they were dishonest.

So what is developing is that Horner hasn't been dishonest but the complainant has.
 
Last edited:
cuke2u said:
Or we are living in a world where dishonest people can make accusations against someone, fabricate evidence then get caught out.
The BBC has quoted Red Bull in that the individual has been suspended because they were dishonest.
Click to expand...

And what reason would Red Bull have to lie or mislead about that, eh...

cuke2u said:
You've got to realise that some will believe anything they read because they have a preconceived mentality
Click to expand...

[singsong]Irony![/singsong]

I mean...you could at least admit to your own "preconceived mentality" that the woman in question lied about everything and how everyone commenting on social media is simply out to get Red Bull ;)
 
Last edited:
JRS said:
And what reason would Red Bull have to lie or mislead about that, eh...



[singsong]Irony![/singsong]

I mean...you could at least admit to your own "preconceived mentality" that the woman in question lied about everything and how everyone commenting on social media is simply out to get Red Bull ;)
Click to expand...
You have evidence that Red Bull has lied and misled anyone in this current predicament?
My preconceived mentality is that everyone is innocent until proved guilty. I have only stated a hypothetical question about the individual and no-one, not anyone, has come up with any evidence that anyone is guilty of anything.
All we actually know is that a investigation was conducted and Horner was absolved of being guilty of the accusations.
That is currently the only truth we can only go on..
 
Last edited:
cuke2u said:
My preconceived mentality is that everyone is innocent until proved guilty. I have only stated a hypothetical question about the individual and no-one, not anyone, has come up with any evidence that anyone is guilty of anything.
Click to expand...

Yet the woman here doesn't deserve similar from you?

cuke2u said:
Or we are living in a world where dishonest people can make accusations against someone, fabricate evidence then get caught out.
The BBC has quoted Red Bull in that the individual has been suspended because they were dishonest.

So what is developing is that Horner hasn't been dishonest but the complainant has.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that she indeed was dishonest?
 
MissChief said:
We now live in a world where the CEO of your company can send you a text message admitting he rubbed one out over you and YOU are the one suspended while he gets away scot-free. Wild.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure they actually had sex. If you read the entire log it seems like they did.
Goes back to an original point I made. If an RB contract doesn't really have anything about hooking up with a colleague then he's done nothing wrong from a legal perspective. His marriage issues outside of the work place should remain private....in fact ALL of this should have been handled in private and that might be why his PA has been suspended.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom