Christian Horner under Investigation

[vorticism]

... what do you expect?

Currently expecting nothing. OP said a name was confirmed then in their next post said that a name wasn't confirmed.

[chrstphrln]

Who said the name is confirmed?

[vorticism]

Please read before posting. Waste of people's time to reply without reading a few posts above. viewtopic.php?p=1196312#p1196312

[myurr]

Please read before posting. Waste of people's time to reply without reading a few posts above. viewtopic.php?p=1196312#p1196312

If you really want the person's name then Google "Christian Horner travelling personal assistant" and ignore the posts about Jenna Fryer. Eventually you'll find a name with the initials FH. That name is visible in one of the screen shots, albeit with the top half clipped. Once you know the name it's easy to match it up.

That's the best you're going to get until she comes forward or Red Bull / CH name her, as I doubt a journalist will go near exposing her more than they have unless there's a big twist in the story.

God knows why her name is important to you though.

[vorticism]

It's not about the name its about determining what is and is not one giant game of telephone. A few post ago someone said there was a name and that there wasn't a name, and you're saying there's not a name but an initial seen on jpeg files of unknown origin which may or may not be connected to a real person who may or may not be attached to a corporate internal investigation of unknown scope/intention.

[myurr]

It's not about the name its about determining what is and is not one giant game of telephone. A few post ago someone said there was a name and that there wasn't a name, and you're saying there's not a name but an initial seen on jpeg files of unknown origin which may or may not be connected to a real person who may or may not be attached to a corporate internal investigation of unknown scope/intention.

No, I'm only giving the initials here as I don't want to expose the name directly. In one of the screenshots you can see her full name written out with the top half clipped. Put it together with the name from Google and you have the identity confirmed to a high degree of certainty.

I still have no idea what you're getting at or why it's important to any of this discussion.

[vorticism]

Not asking anyone to dox anyone, I'm seeing if anyone thinks/knows there are real names and real people in play. You are implying I've asked "who" or asked what these names were, which is not my goal. Intention stated in previous post. Odd that you yourself were apparently willing to apparently snoop/creep on these purported names/identities yourself while claiming that this is in itself also a repugnant act. Shame on you? Regardless. You seem confident the jpegs are authentic.

[maxxer]

Not asking anyone to dox anyone, I'm seeing if anyone thinks/knows there are real names and real people in play. You are implying I've asked "who" or asked what these names were, which is not my goal. Intention stated in previous post. Odd that you yourself were apparently willing to apparently snoop/creep on these purported names/identities yourself while claiming that this is in itself also a repugnant act. Shame on you? Regardless. You seem confident the jpegs are authentic.

Great post with the points you made it should be made sticky. As long as we dont know facts we are just gossiping.

[myurr]

Odd that you yourself were apparently willing to apparently snoop/creep on these purported names/identities yourself while claiming that this is in itself also a repugnant act. Shame on you? Regardless. You seem confident the jpegs are authentic.

When did I claim that?

I am confident the screenshots are authentic and have yet to see a single objective reason to believe they are fake.

[maxxer]

Odd that you yourself were apparently willing to apparently snoop/creep on these purported names/identities yourself while claiming that this is in itself also a repugnant act. Shame on you? Regardless. You seem confident the jpegs are authentic.

When did I claim that?

I am confident the screenshots are authentic and have yet to see a single objective reason to believe they are fake.

Confident ? No i dont think so , you assume they are authentic. As i said it is very easy to fake whatsapp messages.
It doesnt show the phone numbers only the names which you give a contact.

[myurr]

Confident ? No i dont think so , you assume they are authentic. As i said it is very easy to fake whatsapp messages.
It doesnt show the phone numbers only the names which you give a contact.

My confidence is a matter of my own opinion and not something you can dictate. I am confident they are genuine.

That it's easy to fake WhatsApp messages isn't an objective reason for why these specific messages are fake. It's easy enough to deep fake an argument between Jos Verstappen and Christian Horner, yet no one is questioning the validity of the photographs of that happening.

As I say, I've yet to see anyone put forward a single objective reason for why those images definitely are fake.

[maxxer]

Confident ? No i dont think so , you assume they are authentic. As i said it is very easy to fake whatsapp messages.
It doesnt show the phone numbers only the names which you give a contact.

My confidence is a matter of my own opinion and not something you can dictate. I am confident they are genuine.

That it's easy to fake WhatsApp messages isn't an objective reason for why these specific messages are fake. It's easy enough to deep fake an argument between Jos Verstappen and Christian Horner, yet no one is questioning the validity of the photographs of that happening.

As I say, I've yet to see anyone put forward a single objective reason for why those images definitely are fake.

As i have said it is your assumption. And as you are a fan of google. you can google "empty whats app" and you will find enough screenshots to fill out as you want. Actually my whatsapp background is dark for years.
The screenshots which you believe to be true are actually from a very low resolution phone so they go back to 2012 at least.
So at least prove then why these are genuine and we can discuss further, because so far you are posting things which you assume to be true.
Otherwise stop posting your own opinions

[Ground Effect]

For me, the basis of leaning towards them being real is the small matter of Horner not coming out to say they weren't, even when he was asked directly. You don't refuse to comment over something as straightforward as that. "I'm not going to comment on anonymous...." just doesn't fly.

[vorticism]

For me, the basis of leaning towards them being real is the small matter of Horner not coming out to say they weren't, even when he was asked directly.

He was asked specifically about the jpegs of text messages?

[maxxer]

For me, the basis of leaning towards them being real is the small matter of Horner not coming out to say they weren't, even when he was asked directly. You don't refuse to comment over something as straightforward as that. "I'm not going to comment on anonymous...." just doesn't fly.

Take a screenshot on a phone and look at the filename. I have done this on 2 phones and on both of them you get a date and time stamp. Not like the filenames in the leak.