this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
56 points (100.0% liked)

Formula 1

9086 readers
125 users here now

Welcome to Formula1 @ Lemmy.world Lemmy's largest community for Formula 1 and related racing series


Rules


  1. Be respectful to everyone; drivers, lemmings, redditors etc
  2. No gambling, crypto or NFTs
  3. Spoilers are allowed
  4. Non English articles should include a translation in the comments by deepl.com or similar
  5. Paywalled articles should include at least a brief summary in the comments, the wording of the article should not be altered
  6. Social media posts should be posted as screenshots with a link for those who want to view it
  7. Memes are allowed on Monday only as we all do like a laugh or 2, but don’t want to become formuladank.

Up next


F1 Calendar

2024 Calendar

Location Date
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 21-23 Nov
πŸ‡ΆπŸ‡¦ Qatar 29 Nov-01 Dec
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡ͺ Abu Dhabi 06-08 Dec

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

People here really seem to have wanted Horner to be cannoned for this.

[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don't really get people still being convinced he's guilty and saying this is being brushed under the rug. Has it even been confirmed what he was accused of?

People read some unconfirmed gossip articles and think they know the guy and all the facts of the situation. Is there any evidence the independent investigation was a sham?

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

There's zero evidence that RB's investigation wasn't a proper one, no. Certainly not publicly at the very least.

But then again, RB's owners have done some... legally questionable things.

The Thai owner's son hit a police motorbike and dragged him over 100 metres along the road, killing him in a particularly gruesome way, while he was drink driving. He then fled the scene of the crime.

The family initially implied a driver hired by the family was driving, before it being discovered it was the owner's son/heir to RB.

The initial police investigation had to be disbanded because it was found they were attempting to cover up the crime.

The RB owner's son then fled the country, and the family lawyers kept telling the courts he was too poorly or busy with work to attend court.

Finally, after 5 years and lots of legal back and forth, the police put out an arrest warrant.

He still hasn't received any punishment for his crimes.

Obviously these are two very unrelated matters, and Horner should still be presumed innocent unless there's evidence to the contrary. My point is only that I don't find it implausible that the RB owners would brush bad shit under the rug or do something dishonest/legally questionable. They have form.

[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

I was unaware of that RB family incident, it's definitely a shady and unfortunate situation. Although, as you pointed out it's not the same circumstances in this case. It's certainly reasonable to question RBs reaction though.

I just don't understand why people are so adamantly attached to their judgment of guilt. Essentially no info about this entire situation has been shared to form an informed opinion around.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well... yeah? If he's guilty of course most would want him sacked for it

[–] GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Sounds like you have some important information about the case. Maybe you should share with the proper authorities.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Well... yeah? If he's guilty of course most would want him sacked for it

Added emphasis because clearly you missed that very important word.

If he's guilty. If. I never claimed to have any insider knowledge at all, that's just a strawman you made up to get angry at.

Am I to assume if he's guilty you wouldn't want him sacked? That's kinda fucked up.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Can you confirm, do you know what 'if' means? Yes, no?

E: that's a no then.

And being against people being sacked in the event of them being found guilty of sexually harassing employees? Yikes.