this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
58 points (100.0% liked)
Formula 1
9059 readers
48 users here now
Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series
Rules
- Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
- No gambling, crypto or NFTs
- Spoilers are allowed
- Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
- Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
- Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
- Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but donβt want to become formuladank.
Up next
2024 Calendar
| Location | Date |
|---|---|
| πΊπΈ United States | 21-23 Nov |
| πΆπ¦ Qatar | 29 Nov-01 Dec |
| π¦πͺ Abu Dhabi | 06-08 Dec |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What are all of you insinuating in here? I always offer people that accuse me off wrongdoing Β£650,000 even tough I didn't do anything. It's nice to share with others. end sarcasm
I would guess it's a "prid pro quo" situation in all honesty, they where both grown adults and lead each other on. Wrong? Perhaps not. Innocent and not on the edge or extramarital? Absolutely not. Unlawful? Probably not.
Bury it and move on.
https://www.sportskeeda.com/f1/news-christian-horner-reportedly-offered-650-000-settle-sexual-misconduct-investigation-launched-red-bull
While it's suspect on the surface, offering a financial settlement is a very common tactic in regards to avoiding backlash, regardless of whether you are actually guilty or not. Now I'm not saying for a second that him being cleared must mean he is innocent, but the money being offered really isn't evidence of any guilt like you'd think it would be.
Yep. People tend to forget this a lot. Even if a story is entirely false, the damage it can do before anyone figures that out is usually far higher than whatever money they offer up front.
The woman rejecting it would be a very bizarre move if she knew she had no evidence, though.
Surely she, rightly or wrongly, thinks she has an ironclad case to turn down that amount of money?
Of course, that's assuming there was a shush money offer.
Possibly, but it's unlikely we will ever hear the facts of this case, I mean we still haven't had confirmation that the misconduct was even sexual in nature, it was first reported as him bullying a reporter if I'm not mistaken and without the facts we can't say what motivated her to reject the settlement offer.
Maybe I misread something, but wasn't the supposed 650k being made to stop ppl reporting on the matter rather directly to the aggrieved?