Christian Horner
Discussion
skwdenyer said:
Byker28i said:
We know RB have been rather economical with the truth. They claimed it was about Horny's management style...trying to downplay the accusation whilst silencing the accuser...
Sorry if I missed it, but when did RB claim it was about CH's management style? Do you have a source?https://apnews.com/article/red-bull-horner-investi...
https://www.sportskeeda.com/f1/red-bull-boss-chris...
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/18635...
etc
Wheelspinning said:
It's absolutely comical all these keyboard legal experts spouting off when they have about 5% of the information and a pile of pics and correspondence that may (or not be) be genuine, fake or slightly altered.
Quite comically how all the Horny defenders claim the evidence is faked...Wheelspinning said:
This thread is right up there with the toxic 45th President thread, with more than some of the ones who are always right and like the sound of their own voice on there having a busmans holiday on here.
They should all get together somewhere for a meet up; that would be a fun event.
Why is it that people can't discuss things without resorting to personal attacks. Sign of a weak argument?They should all get together somewhere for a meet up; that would be a fun event.
Byker28i said:
Wheelspinning said:
It's absolutely comical all these keyboard legal experts spouting off when they have about 5% of the information and a pile of pics and correspondence that may (or not be) be genuine, fake or slightly altered.
Quite comically how all the Horny defenders claim the evidence is faked...Wheelspinning said:
This thread is right up there with the toxic 45th President thread, with more than some of the ones who are always right and like the sound of their own voice on there having a busmans holiday on here.
They should all get together somewhere for a meet up; that would be a fun event.
Why is it that people can't discuss things without resorting to personal attacks. Sign of a weak argument?They should all get together somewhere for a meet up; that would be a fun event.
If you have any proof of your repeated claims please provide it.
MustangGT said:
Nope. I am with Wheelspinning here. We have little actual provable facts in this case, it is nearly all speculation. Far too little information to make any reliable claims. IRRC neither Wheelspinning, nor I, have ever claimed the evidence is faked, merely that there is not enough evidence to support anything beyond speculation.
If you have any proof of your repeated claims please provide it.
repeated claims? It's what I've repeatedly said, we only have one part, no denials and attempted misdirection and thet there isn't any specific evidence beyond the leaked texts to make Horner look bad, which they succeeded with briefly. Who ever did that, and lets face it, it's probably one of the anti Horner factions in the power struggle, it rather looks like they underestimated how much support he has within the owners etc.If you have any proof of your repeated claims please provide it.
However there's been a lot of positive details released to the press that have been misdirection. That is was about his aggressive management style, that he'd been cleared by the Barrister, that no evidence was presented to prove his guilt... enough to make one question and look beyond simple team loyalty/tribalism. Especially with the reported attempted £600k payoff.
Again, I've said all along it does seem to have been handled poorly, with attempts to sweep it all under that carpet - which finally seems to be happening?
And I've tried to discuss the points, my thoughts, reasoning, without resorting to snide remarks and personal attacks like some.
After all it's a discussion forum.
Byker28i said:
repeated claims? It's what I've repeatedly said, we only have one part, no denials and attempted misdirection.
Other stuff; and
And I've tried to discuss the points, my thoughts, reasoning, without resorting to snide remarks and personal attacks like some.
After all it's a discussion forum.
As you quoted my specific post and have now made 2 further posts with accusations of personal attacks, i take that as directed at myself; can you please highlight the personal attacks i have made against you?Other stuff; and
And I've tried to discuss the points, my thoughts, reasoning, without resorting to snide remarks and personal attacks like some.
After all it's a discussion forum.
Maybe that is a topic relevant example how in this pathetic woke world we now inhabit, someone can allege they have been wronged, put it out in print and let a pile of morons be judge, jury and executioner without having every single fact to hand.
Why do all the 'top of their game' legal experts on here not realise they have less than 5% of the facts, CH will be told explicitly not to discuss the matter including denials, the other party most likely has been told the same by whoever is representing them, and all the spouting on here is led by what has been printed in the media, which again, have maybe slightly more than 5% of the actual facts, but it taken as gospel by many on here.
I will make my judgement on this crazy phrase 'innocent until proven guilty'.
I suppose people on here would have John Leslie in jail for 30 years instead of the half a dozen court cases he has been dragged through to find when all the facts came out he was cleared of any wrongdoing each time.
Anyways, I anticipate your response clearly showing where I have quoted you, made a snide remarks about you, or made a personal attack about you?
Or lets just start with the basics; have I even mentioned Byker28i in my post apart from this one?
I think you hold yourself with a bit too much high regard.
Byker28i said:
Wheelspinning said:
It's absolutely comical all these keyboard legal experts spouting off when they have about 5% of the information and a pile of pics and correspondence that may (or not be) be genuine, fake or slightly altered.
Quite comically how all the Horny defenders claim the evidence is faked...Wheelspinning said:
This thread is right up there with the toxic 45th President thread, with more than some of the ones who are always right and like the sound of their own voice on there having a busmans holiday on here.
They should all get together somewhere for a meet up; that would be a fun event.
Why is it that people can't discuss things without resorting to personal attacks. Sign of a weak argument?They should all get together somewhere for a meet up; that would be a fun event.
Firstly, no one ever gets all the facts.
Secondly, we do have circumstances that conclusions can be drawn from. That these conclusions can be modified, altered or discarded goes for all such conclusions, at whatever stage.
We have only one ‘side’ to the story. That is unfortunate, but we can draw conclusions based on the information. I’m not sure where this mythical 5% comes from, but without any suggestion as to its source, I think discarding is the best option.
RB has a lot of questions to answer. That it fails to do so is a fact, a circumstance that is open to interpretation.
The leak of the messages could be fake of course, but if that was so, we would assume that the injured party, because they severely injured Horner, would reject them; say they was false, made up, spurious and a lie. That he didn’t is another fact that is open to interpretation.
The use of the KC is rather an indicator, as is the suggestion that Horner has been exonerated. Of course he hasn’t, but that’s what he has said. Strong indicator alert.
And there’s more, much more, and all this is just from information from RB. We await the story from the complainant.
RB is being harmed by these accusations. At the very least, it shows they are inept at crisis management.
There is a singular lack of transparency over the matter. This is a course of action RB has decided on and is their right. If we wish to entertain extrapolations that are not contradicted by the evidence, that is our right. It is fun. I enjoy it. It will end once we have sufficient, but by no means all, facts to come to a reasonably supported conclusion.
It is not trial by media. This is a forum.
Forester1965 said:
Horner is far more important to RB than Newey. He creates the platform allowing Newey to perform.
Controversial. I salute your bravery. Such a shame you are so way off beam.Other managers have been able to get the best from Newey. I assume Ferrari will come 2025.
Newey is the genius behind RB's success.
Derek Smith said:
Other managers have been able to get the best from Newey.
Frank and Patrick certainly did. Ron not so much (1 constructors' in 9 years, 1998-2006).Horner (any team boss) has to ensure the entire organisation is funded, equipped and motivated to win. If I had to steal one thing from Red Bull to make that happen, it'd be Christian Horner. I'd have to put parental controls on his WhatsApp, though.
He was up against Brawn/Todt/Schumacher during his time at McLaren, so one WCC and four 2nds isn't too bad. He also went nine years between WCCs at RBR, remember.
I think that all goes to show that it isn't just one man that counts. No designer, no driver, no TP can win all the time, but if you can have multiple successes along the way then you've probably got something special about you.
I think that all goes to show that it isn't just one man that counts. No designer, no driver, no TP can win all the time, but if you can have multiple successes along the way then you've probably got something special about you.
Derek Smith said:
The suggestion that we should not extrapolate without all the facts is nonsensical.
Firstly, no one ever gets all the facts.
Secondly, we do have circumstances that conclusions can be drawn from. That these conclusions can be modified, altered or discarded goes for all such conclusions, at whatever stage.
We have only one ‘side’ to the story. That is unfortunate, but we can draw conclusions based on the information. I’m not sure where this mythical 5% comes from, but without any suggestion as to its source, I think discarding is the best option.
RB has a lot of questions to answer. That it fails to do so is a fact, a circumstance that is open to interpretation.
The leak of the messages could be fake of course, but if that was so, we would assume that the injured party, because they severely injured Horner, would reject them; say they was false, made up, spurious and a lie. That he didn’t is another fact that is open to interpretation.
The use of the KC is rather an indicator, as is the suggestion that Horner has been exonerated. Of course he hasn’t, but that’s what he has said. Strong indicator alert.
And there’s more, much more, and all this is just from information from RB. We await the story from the complainant.
RB is being harmed by these accusations. At the very least, it shows they are inept at crisis management.
There is a singular lack of transparency over the matter. This is a course of action RB has decided on and is their right. If we wish to entertain extrapolations that are not contradicted by the evidence, that is our right. It is fun. I enjoy it. It will end once we have sufficient, but by no means all, facts to come to a reasonably supported conclusion.
It is not trial by media. This is a forum.
As a former officer of the law, your post is disgraceful.Firstly, no one ever gets all the facts.
Secondly, we do have circumstances that conclusions can be drawn from. That these conclusions can be modified, altered or discarded goes for all such conclusions, at whatever stage.
We have only one ‘side’ to the story. That is unfortunate, but we can draw conclusions based on the information. I’m not sure where this mythical 5% comes from, but without any suggestion as to its source, I think discarding is the best option.
RB has a lot of questions to answer. That it fails to do so is a fact, a circumstance that is open to interpretation.
The leak of the messages could be fake of course, but if that was so, we would assume that the injured party, because they severely injured Horner, would reject them; say they was false, made up, spurious and a lie. That he didn’t is another fact that is open to interpretation.
The use of the KC is rather an indicator, as is the suggestion that Horner has been exonerated. Of course he hasn’t, but that’s what he has said. Strong indicator alert.
And there’s more, much more, and all this is just from information from RB. We await the story from the complainant.
RB is being harmed by these accusations. At the very least, it shows they are inept at crisis management.
There is a singular lack of transparency over the matter. This is a course of action RB has decided on and is their right. If we wish to entertain extrapolations that are not contradicted by the evidence, that is our right. It is fun. I enjoy it. It will end once we have sufficient, but by no means all, facts to come to a reasonably supported conclusion.
It is not trial by media. This is a forum.
No wonder respect of the Police is at an all time low.
You have made many posts on here about CH, all based on a tiny % of the actual facts.
You do this as 'it's your right, and it's fun'.
Tell me; I posted you might have 5% of the true facts which you said should be discarded.
Your multiple posts are based on what's been released mostly in the media; what % of these media releases do you think are fully accurate?
30%? 50% 95%?
Has the accuser made a statement saying all of these screenshot were released into the domain by her and every single one of them has not been doctored?
You are aware all social media is very, very easily doctored including the 'end to end encrypted' whatsapp?
A good friend many years ago was accused by his step daughter of sexual abuse.
The baying mob that turned up at his house that same weekend torching his car and smashing the house up did so as they thought 'it was their right. Its fun'; just like you posted.
Not so much when the step daughter later admitted she made it up as he refused to let her go to T in the park as she was 13.
I guess that's all fine in your books also because 'in light of circumstances, conclusions can be drawn'.
Well that's just great.
Up here, we have just had the 'Hate Crime' Act forced upon us.
Now, with an allegation, you can be at work, at home or in a restaurant and Police Scotland can come in, caution you, take you in handcuffs to custody and question you based on said allegation.
That is a Draconian act that has been passed, and can have life changing implications, all whilst the accuser can retain anomity.
I do hope you are never on the end of an accusation such as my friend was; however, if you were, you might have a different view of what 'fun' is and how important 'innocent until proven guilty' is.
For the record, I am not a fan of CH or Red Bull.
Wheelspinning said:
As a former officer of the law, your post is disgraceful.
No wonder respect of the Police is at an all time low.
You have made many posts on here about CH, all based on a tiny % of the actual facts.
You do this as 'it's your right, and it's fun'.
Tell me; I posted you might have 5% of the true facts which you said should be discarded.
Your multiple posts are based on what's been released mostly in the media; what % of these media releases do you think are fully accurate?
30%? 50% 95%?
Has the accuser made a statement saying all of these screenshot were released into the domain by her and every single one of them has not been doctored?
You are aware all social media is very, very easily doctored including the 'end to end encrypted' whatsapp?
A good friend many years ago was accused by his step daughter of sexual abuse.
The baying mob that turned up at his house that same weekend torching his car and smashing the house up did so as they thought 'it was their right. Its fun'; just like you posted.
Not so much when the step daughter later admitted she made it up as he refused to let her go to T in the park as she was 13.
I guess that's all fine in your books also because 'in light of circumstances, conclusions can be drawn'.
Well that's just great.
Up here, we have just had the 'Hate Crime' Act forced upon us.
Now, with an allegation, you can be at work, at home or in a restaurant and Police Scotland can come in, caution you, take you in handcuffs to custody and question you based on said allegation.
That is a Draconian act that has been passed, and can have life changing implications, all whilst the accuser can retain anomity.
I do hope you are never on the end of an accusation such as my friend was; however, if you were, you might have a different view of what 'fun' is and how important 'innocent until proven guilty' is.
For the record, I am not a fan of CH or Red Bull.
I think some perspective is required here.No wonder respect of the Police is at an all time low.
You have made many posts on here about CH, all based on a tiny % of the actual facts.
You do this as 'it's your right, and it's fun'.
Tell me; I posted you might have 5% of the true facts which you said should be discarded.
Your multiple posts are based on what's been released mostly in the media; what % of these media releases do you think are fully accurate?
30%? 50% 95%?
Has the accuser made a statement saying all of these screenshot were released into the domain by her and every single one of them has not been doctored?
You are aware all social media is very, very easily doctored including the 'end to end encrypted' whatsapp?
A good friend many years ago was accused by his step daughter of sexual abuse.
The baying mob that turned up at his house that same weekend torching his car and smashing the house up did so as they thought 'it was their right. Its fun'; just like you posted.
Not so much when the step daughter later admitted she made it up as he refused to let her go to T in the park as she was 13.
I guess that's all fine in your books also because 'in light of circumstances, conclusions can be drawn'.
Well that's just great.
Up here, we have just had the 'Hate Crime' Act forced upon us.
Now, with an allegation, you can be at work, at home or in a restaurant and Police Scotland can come in, caution you, take you in handcuffs to custody and question you based on said allegation.
That is a Draconian act that has been passed, and can have life changing implications, all whilst the accuser can retain anomity.
I do hope you are never on the end of an accusation such as my friend was; however, if you were, you might have a different view of what 'fun' is and how important 'innocent until proven guilty' is.
For the record, I am not a fan of CH or Red Bull.
Nobody is turning up at Horner’s door, nor are they accusing him of crimes against the state (or anyone else)
There’s some information now in the public domain that implies he’s behaved very inappropriately with an employee. People have taken this information at face value and discussed it on an internet forum, until more information comes about. (If it ever does)
It’s rather different to the examples you have given.
Muzzer79 said:
I think some perspective is required here.
Nobody is turning up at Horner’s door, nor are they accusing him of crimes against the state (or anyone else)
There’s some information now in the public domain that implies he’s behaved very inappropriately with an employee. People have taken this information at face value and discussed it on an internet forum, until more information comes about. (If it ever does)
It’s rather different to the examples you have given.
Your right; it implies he 'may' have behaved inappropriately.Nobody is turning up at Horner’s door, nor are they accusing him of crimes against the state (or anyone else)
There’s some information now in the public domain that implies he’s behaved very inappropriately with an employee. People have taken this information at face value and discussed it on an internet forum, until more information comes about. (If it ever does)
It’s rather different to the examples you have given.
However, until all the facts are available, it's bang out of order to be judge, jury and executioner on here as 'it's fun'.
As soon as the basic rights of 'innocent until proven guilty' are removed, I don't think it's fun.
If people want to poke fun, fair enough, that's their perogative; it's the ones who make the statements of someones full on guilt without actual verified facts and steamroller over anyone else offering an alternative view forgetting there is ALWAYS 3 sides to a story is what i passionately disagree with after seeing what happened to a friend on the basis of an allegation.
Byker28i said:
Wheelspinning said:
It's absolutely comical all these keyboard legal experts spouting off when they have about 5% of the information and a pile of pics and correspondence that may (or not be) be genuine, fake or slightly altered.
Quite comically how all the Horny defenders claim the evidence is faked...There are things we do know.
1) an employee of RBR has raised a grievance, that grievance was dismissed, that dismissal has been appealed internally.
2) an employee of RBR has raised a complaint with the FIA, so far with no public outcome
3) an employee of RBR has started the process to take CH/RBR to an employment tribunal
4) an employee of RBR has been suspended on full pay
5) an employee of RBR has appointed new lawyers to take matters forward
6) RB Austria wanted rid of CH, the majority owner of RB backed CH, so he remains in post
7) JV wanted rid of CH, publicly saying so, putting at risk MV future with the team
8) HM was under threat of losing his job, but backed by RB Austria and MV has kept it
9) a series of WhatsApp messages were released to the whole of F1 and the wider world which show sexual harassment, these messages have not been denied by CH as real.
10) CH from day 1 has denied all allegations against him
11) CH brought in his wife as a visual aid and then stated that a line is drawn under the issue, it's still ongoing
12) CH dumped his previous partner who was pregnant/had his child for his current wife
13) CH is in dispute with his Neighbours, again
14) CH often talks b
ks and deflects onto others when he wants an issue to go away, or see's advantage in it
15) the employee who raised the grievance has done everything by the book, following procedures as you would expect someone to do in such circumstances
1) an employee of RBR has raised a grievance, that grievance was dismissed, that dismissal has been appealed internally.
2) an employee of RBR has raised a complaint with the FIA, so far with no public outcome
3) an employee of RBR has started the process to take CH/RBR to an employment tribunal
4) an employee of RBR has been suspended on full pay
5) an employee of RBR has appointed new lawyers to take matters forward
6) RB Austria wanted rid of CH, the majority owner of RB backed CH, so he remains in post
7) JV wanted rid of CH, publicly saying so, putting at risk MV future with the team
8) HM was under threat of losing his job, but backed by RB Austria and MV has kept it
9) a series of WhatsApp messages were released to the whole of F1 and the wider world which show sexual harassment, these messages have not been denied by CH as real.
10) CH from day 1 has denied all allegations against him
11) CH brought in his wife as a visual aid and then stated that a line is drawn under the issue, it's still ongoing
12) CH dumped his previous partner who was pregnant/had his child for his current wife
13) CH is in dispute with his Neighbours, again
14) CH often talks b
ks and deflects onto others when he wants an issue to go away, or see's advantage in it15) the employee who raised the grievance has done everything by the book, following procedures as you would expect someone to do in such circumstances
Kart16 said:
Which evidence? All those WhatsApp print screens just show the woman was happily engaged with Horner’s conversation. She even mentions about going to his hotel room.
She also repeatedly told him to stop, he didn't. He then badgered her to delete these messages, she didn't, he did. All assuming they are real messages.Getting very pointy pencils again on this forum. Chill pills should be prescribed until the evidence is put in the proper forum, with open justice so we can all see. Just like the late Spanker.
What CH has been accused of is not nearly as colourful (but if proven would be more wrongful) as Spanker, whose predelictions are immortalised in the judgement of Mr Justice Eady. Ahh, Spanker paid for several prostitutes in uniforms to shave his bottom and whip him whilst speaking with ze German accent in a S&M dundgeon, the reporting of which with a Nazi connotation was defamatory and a gross invasion of his right to a private life...but none of that had any bearing on his FIA president position.
What CH has been accused of is not nearly as colourful (but if proven would be more wrongful) as Spanker, whose predelictions are immortalised in the judgement of Mr Justice Eady. Ahh, Spanker paid for several prostitutes in uniforms to shave his bottom and whip him whilst speaking with ze German accent in a S&M dundgeon, the reporting of which with a Nazi connotation was defamatory and a gross invasion of his right to a private life...but none of that had any bearing on his FIA president position.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff