Christian Horner under Investigation

[myurr]

Oh I agree that there should be genuine concerns with false accusations, and that those who falsify claims should be punished.

I take great issue at the suggestion that having a case dismissed automatically means that it was a malicious claim. There is a burden of proof the other way round to show that the claim was deliberately fabricated. There is a large grey area between the two where either the evidence was insufficient, there was genuine misunderstanding or misinterpretation, there was a process or procedural deficiency, etc.

I never read that from his post. What he said was:

If it's genuine, there would be ample evidence to fire the haarasser. If not and the committee finds wrong intent in complainant's part, the complainant should be fired for attempting damage of reputation for someone.

...which to me doesn't imply that's it's a given - just that it's a possibility.

That is fair, so I'll apologise if I've misinterpreted what he said. However his first post on the matter that started the post chain wasn't caveated and explicitly says that if the KC has looked at the evidence and determined it doesn't justify the complaint then it's malicious and should be punished.

Ideally, she should be fired for falsifying a complaint if that is indeed the case. If there is no evidence (not the filmsy whatsapp screenshots available online), then it's an attempt to tarnish another employee. If the internal investigation lead by a KC barrister has looked at the available evidence and determined, it doesn't justify the harassment complaint, it amounts to tarnishing reputation of the accused employee. So it would be right to simply let her go. If the woman thinks she is right, then she should file a legal case and if she doesn't, she was making this up all this while.

[TFSA]

It’s been suggested since this broke that payoffs have been offered and refused. Maybe suspension is more leaverage.

Whatever, I feel RBR needs to be transparent about about what has happenned and why, as the optics of this are very bad.

They can't. It's an internal issue, and leaks or not, it needs to stay internal. In fact, I'm pretty sure the law actually demands that they can't speak about it (both privacy laws and data protection laws).

We're not entitled to any information here. This is a case for Red Bull and the complainant to handle themselves, or for the courts to handle (if it's taken that far). It's not a case for the media or the public to handle.

[littlebigcat]

It’s been suggested since this broke that payoffs have been offered and refused. Maybe suspension is more leaverage.

Whatever, I feel RBR needs to be transparent about about what has happenned and why, as the optics of this are very bad.

They can't. It's an internal issue, and leaks or not, it needs to stay internal. In fact, I'm pretty sure the law actually demands that they can't speak about it (both privacy laws and data protection laws).

We're not entitled to any information here. This is a case for Red Bull and the complainant to handle themselves, or for the courts to handle (if it's taken that far). It's not a case for the media or the public to handle.

However, if they fire her and she takes it to ACAS and a tribunal, it becomes very much public. RB and RBR need to be careful that isn’t the path they are setting themselves on.

[TFSA]

However, if they fire her and she takes it to ACAS and a tribunal, it becomes very much public. RB and RBR need to be careful that isn’t the path they are setting themselves on.

You're assuming that Red Bull and RBR are the only ones who wants this to stay private. It's not unlikely that the accuser wants it to stay private as well. Publicity means that she is likely to face (further) harrassment from deranged fans, and if her case turns out actually to be somewhat weak, it's not a good look on her either.

But it seems to me that the case was always somewhat headed in that direction, particularly if the rumors that they offered to pay her, and she refused, is true. That would have been a quick and easy way to wrap the case up.

[Farnborough]

It’s been suggested since this broke that payoffs have been offered and refused. Maybe suspension is more leaverage.

Whatever, I feel RBR needs to be transparent about about what has happenned and why, as the optics of this are very bad.

They can't. It's an internal issue, and leaks or not, it needs to stay internal. In fact, I'm pretty sure the law actually demands that they can't speak about it (both privacy laws and data protection laws).

We're not entitled to any information here. This is a case for Red Bull and the complainant to handle themselves, or for the courts to handle (if it's taken that far). It's not a case for the media or the public to handle.

Well said TFSA.

It was brought up in fractured delivery on here, but not emphatically put.

Its imperative that these situations are handled in isolation within any employment scenario, the need for this driven by protection of the complainant in the secure knowledge that their situation is considered in full and without prejudice.
Without this confidence, it's highly problematic and ultimately detrimental to anyone subjected to behaviour against them in bringing these concerns forward.
It does nobody any good to have such details within the public domain, privacy should be utmost until conclusion at least.

It's never acceptable to "leak" any case of this type out of the discreet domain in which it can be originally considered.

This scenario (the whole one in view now) is hugely detrimental to future employees in coming forward to address serious conditions in their own employment, very much a negative and backward step for all involved.

Someone, in leaking this originally, is doing employees a significant disservice to further their own/personal agenda

[myurr]

You're assuming that Red Bull and RBR are the only ones who wants this to stay private. It's not unlikely that the accuser wants it to stay private as well. Publicity means that she is likely to face (further) harrassment from deranged fans, and if her case turns out actually to be somewhat weak, it's not a good look on her either.

But it seems to me that the case was always somewhat headed in that direction, particularly if the rumors that they offered to pay her, and she refused, is true. That would have been a quick and easy way to wrap the case up.

You're assuming Red Bull want to keep it private. They publicly confirmed the investigation into Horner, and they have (presumably) leaked that Horner's accuser has been suspended and that it was for being dishonest.

They're happy to use the press to control a narrative when it suits.

[FW17]

[TFSA]

VIDEO

RPM is fun, but i don't think this is the appropriate place for his videos or journalistic take.

[PierreW]

Things are starting to fall in lines.

The accuser suspended. The Austrian clan and Jos sidelined.

Horner solidifying his hold on RBR, Max continuing his committment to the team, the majority shareholder fully supporting Horner and all the team engineer and direction behind him.

[Ben1980]

I do find it strange how so many people, who know, he is a relationship cheat and liar, still find it hard to think he has been cheating and lying in another relationship.

[TFSA]

I do find it strange how so many people, who know, he is a relationship cheat and liar, still find it hard to think he has been cheating and lying in another relationship.

I find it strange that people seem to think that bears any weight in a case like this.

In any decent court, this wouldn't pass as evidence or valid testimony, like that would be excluded and not be brought in front of the jury, because it's not considered relevant to the case.

[Ben1980]

I do find it strange how so many people, who know, he is a relationship cheat and liar, still find it hard to think he has been cheating and lying in another relationship.

I find it strange that people seem to think that bears any weight in a case like this.

In any decent court, this wouldn't pass as evidence or valid testimony, like that would be excluded and not be brought in front of the jury, because it's not considered relevant to the case.

That's irrelevant, this isn't a court case. This is a case of public opinion.

And my point still stands. People seem to think he wouldn't do anything, knowing full well that he has done in the past.

[FW17]

Christian not invited to Jos birthday bash last Monday celebrated in dubai

[Ben1980]

Christian not invited to Jos birthday bash last Monday celebrated in dubai

Shock!

[myurr]

I do find it strange how so many people, who know, he is a relationship cheat and liar, still find it hard to think he has been cheating and lying in another relationship.

I find it strange that people seem to think that bears any weight in a case like this.

In any decent court, this wouldn't pass as evidence or valid testimony, like that would be excluded and not be brought in front of the jury, because it's not considered relevant to the case.

You seem like you're at least somewhat versed in the law. Do you think there's any milage in the theory that Red Bull / Horner are deliberately breaching employment law with his accuser on a trumped up charge so that she'll lawyer up and head down the legal route? With a court case in play the leaker and press would be much more careful about what they put into the public domain, and it allows Horner / Red Bull to make her a settlement offering with an NDA, which her lawyers would advise her to take if the monetary value is high enough. The courts tend to frown upon cases where a reasonable settlement was offered but rejected. A court case could also allow Horner to apply for a super injunction to keep it out the British press at least.

The penalties of heading down that route are purely financial, so even if it costs them a couple of million pounds it's not
going to break the bank, and if it keeps the story out of the press for a while it allows Horner to complete the RBT deal and solidify his power base.