TFSA wrote: ↑16 Mar 2024, 14:05
PapayaFan481 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2024, 10:52
izzy wrote: ↑16 Mar 2024, 00:26
But still I keep coming up against the question why she hasn't simply shown say a journalist, a trusted one, the original chats on her WhatsApp account? Instead of the screenshots that aren't verifiable or 100% convincing. And who has access to her phone, to take them? If it does go to court then she is going to have to produce the original ones isn't she, so if they're different it's going to come out. The obvious reason is one or two have been altered and they change how they all read. And the KC did see the originals, or he was denied.
Because doing so would likely make any legal case she might bring a lot harder to win and could even open her up to a legal challenge herself.
This is plain and simply false. If the texts are real, she has a legal right to show them, since she is a party to the conversation. It won't open her to a lawsuit (not one she's gonna lose at any rate), and it is also unlikely to compromise any legal case she may make. Courts take whistleblowers rights seriously, as long as they haven't publicized any confidential information.
It's a breach of privacy laws for her to share these personal messages with the press:
https://harassmentlawyer.co.uk/online-b ... -in-the-uk.
Whistleblower protections are for reporting via the correct channels - i.e. taking through Red Bull's internal processes, to arbitration / tribunal, sharing with the regulator (FIA in this case), etc. They don't cover just taking the story to the media because you felt like it, when you haven't exhausted those channels.