Christian Horner under Investigation

[TeamKoolGreen]

The Prince is no King. So he appoints his buddy to be the CEO. That's why Horner sprung into action. He doesn't want to work under some hot shot who's in over their head

[Watto]

BBC is confirming the appeal, and also confirms that it's the board who made the decision not the independent investigator. This is currently on the front page of BBC news: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/68576295

Good on her if she thinks she’s been wronged here. I wonder how far it will if Horner is still backed by the Thai owner.

I think though it makes 2 of the rumours as wrong one that she’d been paid off $1m

Also - less certain but the Horner will be sacked before the AusGP after losing the support of the Thai owner re it might hurt sales in the US, feel they could made that decision without the appeal if that was the case and hearing the appeal and making a decision in a few days is a very tall ask.

If they (the Thais) change their minds and decide to fire him they would/should do it at the conclusion of the appeals process. That would at least give the impression of a working process, and they can give some excuse as to what changed between the original dismissal and the appeal to save face. But firing him before the appeal is finished would look very strange.

Thats fair more I was referring to him being sacked before the Aust GP to hear the appear go through the decision within a few day seems tight as the rumor said.

[Venturiation]

fia are trying to cover it up

[Wouter]

fia are trying to cover it up

[izzy]

Well it's all going downhill extremely quickly! They'd better start remembering the media are in charge, and it's not like they all need paddock passes.

[Rodak]

I'm sure I've missed other examples, but I hope you get the idea that Red Bull's actions if they have orchestrated a cover up would certainly expose them to a charge of bringing the sport into disrepute.

No, if this is all true Red Bull's actions have brought Red Bull into disrepute. The 'sport' had nothing to do with it.

[pipoloko]

171 pages since this s...t started and we are still discussing about CH and a potential affair?
guys you dont know what is going on?
It is not new that CH want to spin off RBR and onw the team, whether is he going to succed or not ? depends en RB owners that is the only problem , is not about a laidy !!

[venkyhere]

171 pages since this s...t started and we are still discussing about CH and a potential affair?
guys you dont know what is going on?
It is not new that CH want to spin off RBR and onw the team, whether is he going to succed or not ? depends en RB owners that is the only problem , is not about a laidy !!

We also mix into our debate pool, legality, morality and business aspects ; so that we have a proper soup that can be stirred

[Rodak]

What a bunch of wasted electrons.......

[Edax]

Strictly speaking though....is it bringing the sport/Formula 1 into disrepute? If anything its more damaging to the team, that dragging F1 name down. Its the journalists that drag the whole thing down.

True. If anything it is a disqualification of the (tabloid) media which in their desperation to keep this story going are publishing wilder and wilder conspiracy theories while moving further and further, away from the basic principles of journalism.

In the end I think this story is in a deadlock since the publication of the files and will remain so.

Just imagine that horner was a woman and the accuser was a man. Then the story would be: a man has a work dispute with his female boss. That dispute is not settled satisfactory, so the man decides to distribute some sexual explicit material of his boss, within the company and to customers, in the hope to get the company embarrassed and her fired. Whatever the boss might have done to “deserve” it, becomes irrelevant in the act of distribution.

All those laws that were implemented as a result of the me too movement, now work for Horner. So horner is both the perpetrator and the victim. Whatever Horner has done or how we think about it, I bet no one wants to touch this with a 10 ft pole.

So we might as well move on.

[izzy]

Well I finally bothered to find the screenshots, I think? A Google drive called 'file drop'. It reads quite authentic, lower case starts and everything, but there's nothing coercive in there at all, she has plenty of control. At one point he hopes she didn't find one offensive and apologises, and it's she who chose a separate hotel. Are there fakes around? This has 79 images, and no 76 is a finger.

But as far as this one goes, anyone would dismiss the allegation.

[myurr]

it's she who chose a separate hotel

I presume you mean "chose the same hotel". If so then I think that comment indicates why you're seeing these messages in a different light to most others.

The way I read them was that Horner chose to travel separately and stay in a different hotel as that was the only way he could control his behaviour around the victim. She then tells him that in order to do her job, that of a travelling PA, she needs to travel with him and stay close by. She does not say that she wants to stay in the same hotel as she finds his behaviour acceptable, quite the opposite. There are many times throughout the messages where she says he cannot behave like that, what would Geri think, how would he feel if Geri was acting like this with her assistant, etc. She explicitly asks him to stop and never once, in the messages we've seen at least, encourages him. She also calls out his in person behaviour of calling round her hotel room, asking what she's up to, etc. His harassment clearly goes beyond text messages, and he doesn't deny that in his replies.

You have to remember that the lens through which these messages need to be viewed is that of Horner being her employer. She is dependent on him for continued employment, and tasked with working directly with him to ensure he is organised and has everything he needs. She cannot perform her duties should Horner choose to distance himself from her. Likewise as an employer the law states that Horner must take every reasonable step to ensure that she has a workplace free from sexual harassment. It is against employment law for him to harass her in any way, or to change her duties / role / employment status because he can't stop himself from harassing her so seeks to remove or sideline her instead.

It's in that same light that the message about him offering her a way out must be viewed. She replies to him that she doesn't want to leave her job or stop working with her colleagues - an unacceptable position for an employer to put a subordinate in.

Also, if you feel these messages are so innocuous then do you think Horner could be behind the leak? If every other reasonable person would see no harm in those messages then having them in the public domain helps put the matter to rest, leaving it between him and Geri to sort out in private. That hasn't been the case, and Horner has been damaged by having these messages in the public domain - how do you reconcile that with your view that the messages do not constitute a valid employment grievance?

[izzy]

it's she who chose a separate hotel

I presume you mean "chose the same hotel". If so then I think that comment indicates why you're seeing these messages in a different light to most others.

The way I read them was that Horner chose to travel separately and stay in a different hotel as that was the only way he could control his behaviour around the victim. She then tells him that in order to do her job, that of a travelling PA, she needs to travel with him and stay close by.

oh yes you're right, now i read them again. I'll go through more slowly and respond to the rest in a bit.

[Mogster]

Aye. I understood the messages in the same way as myurr.

Someone realising they are being sidelined and that their job is now threatened. Not someone that was wanting to be close to someone to continue a career damaging relationship. Of course they could be interpreted in a different way.

[izzy]

If you look at no 66. It's a relationship, that's illicit and full of conflicts. They're talking about 'safer sleep recommendations', that he can't do in public. He makes a confession, about when she 'got him out of control' on a flight and she just asks if he finished off in the bathroom. In other posts she's complaining about him insisting on separate hotels because Geri is going to be around. He apologises and accepts her boundaries.

So you can pick bits out and reinterpret them, but when you read it all they were quite close. They're open with each other. They have been lonely. She sets limits perfectly easily, like 'nope', and he admits he's exposed himself emotionally to her. And he has. He worries about her judging him, she worries about him not trusting her, They were close enough to hurt each other, and I suppose that's what's happened.