2024 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[Seanspeed]

Police are not federal employees in the US.

But anyways, you're going to tell yourself what you need to. The idea that Horner was completely absolved of guilt and nothing more can be said of it is laughable to many people given it was an internal investigation and the cloud of questionable stuff surrounding it. We may never know the full truth of the situation, but acting like it couldn't possibly be a source of any tensions because this inside investigation said he was innocent is a terrible argument.

Think you should read my post you first replied to again, but don't stop after the first section just because you don't agree to it

I did and see nothing I missed. You have your mind made up though, as you always do.

[TeamKoolGreen]

You cant really be that naive, right?

They investigated themselves and found themselves innocent of wrongdoing. That's hardly some conclusive outcome that immediately makes everything go away, and the treatment of the employee afterwards really paints a poor picture of the handling of the whole situation.

This is like saying that US police officers that are 'absolved' of doing anything wrong after internal investigations cleared them must be declared perfectly innocent when we have clear as day body cam footage of them doing something awful.

Comparing private company with a private attorney to a federal administration is beyond apples and oranges

The attorney in question has to comply to ethical standards during these proceedings. Not because they're paid to do it, but because any additional investigation having very different conclusion would mean game over for said attorney and the company they work for. At best, you can soften some minor details, but you can't completely twist the narrative of the case.

On the other hand, who's paying the top-rated legal office to represent the employee in their legal appeal, or was it outright lawsuit? Reported to be way beyond said employee's pay grade

Police are not federal employees in the US.

But anyways, you're going to tell yourself what you need to. The idea that Horner was completely absolved of guilt and nothing more can be said of it is laughable to many people given it was an internal investigation and the cloud of questionable stuff surrounding it. We may never know the full truth of the situation, but acting like it couldn't possibly be a source of any tensions because this inside investigation said he was innocent is a terrible argument.

Speaking of police, what we know 100% is that no crime was committed by Christian Horner. If there was, law enforcement would have been involved. And this also passed through the independent barrister. Who is legally obliged to report any criminal behavior.

So what exactly is Horner guilty of ? Horner to me is the victim. The timing of all of this was no coincidence. It suggests that he was honey potted.

Much slander has been written about Horner on extremely spurious grounds. His lawyers will probably put out some lawsuits.

[Seanspeed]

Speaking of police, what we know 100% is that no crime was committed by Christian Horner. If there was, law enforcement would have been involved.

So what exactly is Horner guilty of ? Horner to me is the victim. The timing of all of this was no coincidence. It suggests that he was honey potted.

Much slander has been written about Horner on extremely spurious grounds. His lawyers will probably put out some lawsuits.

jfc

[Vanja #66]

I think we should clarify for people how this process works, because there seems to be confusion about the role of the investigator in independent workplace investigations.

In cases like these the "independent investigator" gathers information and evidence trying to establish facts, they do not make proclamations of innocence or any recommendations about what the outcome of the grievance should be. It is the job of the board to decide the outcome. So when the press release from RB says that the "grievance has been dismissed" it simply means that (in this case) the controlling board member Yoovidhya has voted for dismissal. The release makes no mention of "innocence", or "cleared of wrongdoing", or what the investigation concluded. Simply put all we know is that the controlling board member voted against the grievance.

So you're saying not only the attorney but also Red Bull would stoop to short-term hiding behind self-proclaimed ruling, only to risk being fully exposed in the later appeal process where they have no control over the outcome? Seriously?

[dialtone]

Speaking of police, what we know 100% is that no crime was committed by Christian Horner. If there was, law enforcement would have been involved. And this also passed through the independent barrister. Who is legally obliged to report any criminal behavior.

So what exactly is Horner guilty of ? Horner to me is the victim. The timing of all of this was no coincidence. It suggests that he was honey potted.

Much slander has been written about Horner on extremely spurious grounds. His lawyers will probably put out some lawsuits.

Horner is a victim?

[Watto]

Comparing private company with a private attorney to a federal administration is beyond apples and oranges

The attorney in question has to comply to ethical standards during these proceedings. Not because they're paid to do it, but because any additional investigation having very different conclusion would mean game over for said attorney and the company they work for. At best, you can soften some minor details, but you can't completely twist the narrative of the case.

On the other hand, who's paying the top-rated legal office to represent the employee in their legal appeal, or was it outright lawsuit? Reported to be way beyond said employee's pay grade

Police are not federal employees in the US.

But anyways, you're going to tell yourself what you need to. The idea that Horner was completely absolved of guilt and nothing more can be said of it is laughable to many people given it was an internal investigation and the cloud of questionable stuff surrounding it. We may never know the full truth of the situation, but acting like it couldn't possibly be a source of any tensions because this inside investigation said he was innocent is a terrible argument.

Speaking of police, what we know 100% is that no crime was committed by Christian Horner. If there was, law enforcement would have been involved. And this also passed through the independent barrister. Who is legally obliged to report any criminal behavior.

So what exactly is Horner guilty of ? Horner to me is the victim. The timing of all of this was no coincidence. It suggests that he was honey potted.

Much slander has been written about Horner on extremely spurious grounds. His lawyers will probably put out some lawsuits.

The barrister is not obliged to report anything he wrights a report for the board - the board/who ever employs them can set the parameters of what’s to be investigated who can be interviewed what is being investigated-

He simply reports on the exposure the company may have

The company board than then choose if they want to act on the report if there are grounds found

[CHT]

I thought we already have a CH thread for this?

[TeamKoolGreen]

Policeer know the full truth of the situation, but acting like it couldn't possibly be a source of any tensions because this inside investigation said he was innocent is a terrible argument.

Speaking of police, what we know 100% is that no crime was committed by Christian Horner. If there was, law enforcement would have been involved. And this also passed through the independent barrister. Who is legally obliged to report any criminal behavior.

So what exactly is Horner guilty of ? Horner to me is the victim. The timing of all of this was no coincidence. It suggests that he was honey potted.

Much slander has been written about Horner on extremely spurious grounds. His lawyers will probably put out some lawsuits.

The barrister is not obliged to report anything he wrights a report for the board - the board/who ever employs them can set the parameters of what’s to be investigated who can be interviewed what is being investigated-

He simply reports on the exposure the company may have

The company board than then choose if they want to act on the report if there are grounds found

If the barrister discovers that a crime had taken place then they have to report said crime to the police.

[Watto]

Speaking of police, what we know 100% is that no crime was committed by Christian Horner. If there was, law enforcement would have been involved. And this also passed through the independent barrister. Who is legally obliged to report any criminal behavior.

So what exactly is Horner guilty of ? Horner to me is the victim. The timing of all of this was no coincidence. It suggests that he was honey potted.

Much slander has been written about Horner on extremely spurious grounds. His lawyers will probably put out some lawsuits.

The barrister is not obliged to report anything he wrights a report for the board - the board/who ever employs them can set the parameters of what’s to be investigated who can be interviewed what is being investigated-

He simply reports on the exposure the company may have

The company board than then choose if they want to act on the report if there are grounds found

If the barrister discovers that a crime had taken place then they have to report said crime to the police.

No they don’t.


This is also a civil matter not a criminal one.

There maybe a few cases where reporting would be required but this would not be one. The barriers is working for RBR. Most of the time RBR would be protected by privilege.

[CHT]

RBR just posted a page of AN, addressing him as a Legend.

https://www.redbullracing.com/int-en/th ... rian-newey

[Cs98]

I think we should clarify for people how this process works, because there seems to be confusion about the role of the investigator in independent workplace investigations.

In cases like these the "independent investigator" gathers information and evidence trying to establish facts, they do not make proclamations of innocence or any recommendations about what the outcome of the grievance should be. It is the job of the board to decide the outcome. So when the press release from RB says that the "grievance has been dismissed" it simply means that (in this case) the controlling board member Yoovidhya has voted for dismissal. The release makes no mention of "innocence", or "cleared of wrongdoing", or what the investigation concluded. Simply put all we know is that the controlling board member voted against the grievance.

So you're saying not only the attorney but also Red Bull would stoop to short-term hiding behind self-proclaimed ruling, only to risk being fully exposed in the later appeal process where they have no control over the outcome? Seriously?

You can ignore what I'm saying but it doesn't change how this process works. So again, for those who are genuinely interested in how this works, the investigator does not make any ruling or recommendation in the case, this is a simple misunderstanding on behalf of some. They are only there to gather information, the board makes the decision for how they want to proceed and are the ones responsible for that decision in a potential court case.

But the second part of your question, would RB stoop to hiding it? Or more specifically, would Yoovidhya (considering he is the only relevant board member) stoop to hiding it? That is the relevant question to ask. Given the damning evidence that was leaked, given the obvious discomfort from RB Austria with how Yoovidhya handled the decision, I would say it's very likely they did stoop to hiding it, yes.

[CHT]

Any idea when RBR will announce the replacement for AN as CTO? Perhaps there will be some restructuring at RBR soon.

AN claim that CH is a business partner, any idea what business or company?

[Cs98]

Any idea when RBR will announce the replacement for AN as CTO? Perhaps there will be some restructuring at RBR soon.

AN claim that CH is a business partner, any idea what business or company?

Not sure there will be a replacement. The CTO position was basically put there to accomodate Newey specifically.

[TeamKoolGreen]

Any idea when RBR will announce the replacement for AN as CTO? Perhaps there will be some restructuring at RBR soon.

AN claim that CH is a business partner, any idea what business or company?

Umm Red Bull Technologies. Who are building a hypercar.

[organic]

My future lies with Red Bull at the moment,” says Verstappen, where that clause is not entirely unimportant. "I have learned that I should not always say everything in the media, because that is of no use to anyone. I understand that Toto is interested and optimistic, but again: at the moment I can only say that I want to stay with the team. Because I believe in this project. But at the bottom line you don't know what will happen in the future.”