Accusations of Pedophilia and U.S. Law

[Debater Slayer]

Reading about the defamation case involving Elon Musk and Vernon Unsworth has made me wonder: is calling someone a "pedophile" in a public space or on a public platform, such as Twitter, illegal in the U.S. or not?

Excerpted for some context on the case:

During an interview with CNN, the diver suggested the billionaire "stick his submarine where it hurts". Mr Musk, who now has nearly 30 million followers, responded with a series of tweets about Mr Unsworth - including the one calling him "pedo guy". It was later deleted.

Moreover:

What else was said at court?

Testifying over two days on Tuesday and Wednesday, Mr Musk told the court he did not expect the "pedo" tweet to be taken literally.

He said that at the time he thought Mr Unsworth was "just some random creepy guy" who was "unrelated to the rescue".

Mr Musk apologised on Twitter and in court for his outburst.

Contesting this, Mr Wood cited another now-deleted tweet the billionaire sent to his followers saying: "Bet ya a signed dollar it's true."

He also cited an email exchange that Mr Musk had with a Buzzfeed reporter who contacted him for comment on the threat of legal action, where the entrepreneur said: "Stop defending child rapists."

Elon Musk wins defamation case over 'pedo guy' tweet about caver

The plaintiff's lawyer commented that the lack of explicit identification in the Tweet was the jury's grounds for acquitting Musk. The Times also stated the same:

Wood also tweeted saying the jury's verdict was reached based on the fact that Musk never named Unsworth in his tweet, and was therefore judged to have not identified him.

The Times also reported lack of identification as being behind the jury's reasoning. Wood called the verdict a "miscarriage of justice."

Elon Musk's win over Vernon Unsworth was a miscarriage of justice, according to Unsworth's lawyer

If the target of the accusation is almost universally understood to be a specific person, is there really "lack of identification" according to U.S. law? In what cases would accusing someone of being a pedophile and repeating the statement in an email result in a conviction of defamation/libel under U.S. law?

 

[Subduction Zone]

They both attacked each other verbally in public. Calling him a "pedo-guy" was clearly an insult and not to be taken seriously just as some of his posts to Musk. I do believe that Unsworth said something about Elon putting his submarine in an inappropriate place. It was a stupid lawsuit that probably should have been thrown out by the judge. It took the jury only an hour to come to a unanimous decision. That is an absolute minimum time. Most of that would have been going over mandatory steps.. Unsworth was not exactly a gracious loser. He should have owned up to the fact that he had no basis for his lawsuit. There was no "miscarriage of justice".

By the way, in many ways I am not an Elon Musk fan. I do believe that Unsworth was correct in calling it a publicity stunt since Musk gave no real thought to the use of his submarine.

 

[Debater Slayer]

They both attacked each other verbally in public. Calling him a "pedo-guy" was clearly an insult and not to be taken seriously just as some of his posts to Musk. I do believe that Unsworth said something about Elon putting his submarine in an inappropriate place. It was a stupid lawsuit that probably should have been thrown out by the judge. It took the jury only an hour to come to a unanimous decision. That is an absolute minimum time. Most of that would have been going over mandatory steps.. Unsworth was not exactly a gracious loser. He should have owned up to the fact that he had no basis for his lawsuit. There was no "miscarriage of justice".

By the way, in many ways I am not an Elon Musk fan. I do believe that Unsworth was correct in calling it a publicity stunt since Musk gave no real thought to the use of his submarine.

Unsworth's lawyer apparently mentioned that the accusation resulted in consequences for his client's reputation and social standing. Do you believe that to be completely false, then?

Also, if the "pedo guy" remark was not to be taken seriously, then why did Musk double down on it in his email to the Buzzfeed reporter?

I don't know whether the above claim is true, but considering how many people follow Musk's social media and are likely to be influenced by his statements, I think it's possible for such a comment to do damage.

 

[Suave]

Reading about the defamation case involving Elon Musk and Vernon Unsworth has made me wonder: is calling someone a "pedophile" in a public space or on a public platform, such as Twitter, illegal in the U.S. or not?

Excerpted for some context on the case:



Moreover:



Elon Musk wins defamation case over 'pedo guy' tweet about caver

The plaintiff's lawyer commented that the lack of explicit identification in the Tweet was the jury's grounds for acquitting Musk. The Times also stated the same:



Elon Musk's win over Vernon Unsworth was a miscarriage of justice, according to Unsworth's lawyer

If the target of the accusation is almost universally understood to be a specific person, is there really "lack of identification" according to U.S. law? In what cases would accusing someone of being a pedophile and repeating the statement in an email result in a conviction of defamation/libel under U.S. law?

If an adult were sexually attracted towards any pubescence person, they should technically not be considered as being a pedpphile. For example, if somebody were to have been attracted to some of his teenage daughter's classmates, he should never have been labeled as being a pedophile, That was just plain wrong!

 

[Debater Slayer]

If an adult were sexually attracted towards any pubescence person, they should technically not be considered as being a pedpphile. For example, if somebody were to have been attracted to some of his teenage daughter's classmates, he should never have been labeled as being a pedophile, That was just plain wrong!

I'm not sure what your point is. I think the Tweet was thoughtless and petty as well, but I'm asking about the legal aspect thereof.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Unsworth's lawyer apparently mentioned that the accusation resulted in consequences for his client's reputation and social standing. Do you believe that to be completely false, then?

I don't know whether the above claim is true, but considering how many people follow Musk's social media and are likely to be influenced by his statements, I think it's possible for such a comment to do damage.

Sounds bogus. And it would need to be supported by evidence. It is more likely that the public argument caused that harm. And he was as much a part of that as Musk was. I do believe that the "pedo-guy" comment came after the suggestion to put the submarine where the sun don't shine.

Don't get into big public arguments where ad homs are thrown if you can't afford it.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Sounds bogus. And it would need to be supported by evidence. It is more likely that the public argument caused that harm. And he was as much a part of that as Musk was. I do believe that the "pedo-guy" comment came after the suggestion to put the submarine where the sun don't shine.

Don't get into big public arguments where ad homs are thrown if you can't afford it.

Ad hominems that can cause damage to one's reputation are only a small subset of personal attacks, though. Accusations of pedophilia are among those.

I edited my post shortly before you responded to it to add a question:

Also, if the "pedo guy" remark was not to be taken seriously, then why did Musk double down on it in his email to the Buzzfeed reporter?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ad hominems that can cause damage to one's reputation are only a small subset of personal attacks, though. Accusations of pedophilia are among those.

I edited my post shortly before you responded to it to add a question:

I don't know why. And in the US the standards are quite a bit higher for this sort of charge. As to the fight it looks more like an example of "mutual combat". If two men get into a fight with each other it is vey hard to sue the other for damages. There is of course to show that it was two sided this quote from Unsworth:

"During an interview with CNN, the diver suggested the billionaire "stick his submarine where it hurts"."

Now does that sound very nice? I don't think that the JDART was even needed by Musk (by the way Google recognized that acronym). Musk could not sue for a threat of physical violence. It works both ways here.

They tried to have the trial set in London where the laws are not so lax as they are here, but I see that he failed at that. Different countries, different laws and standards. Musk was probably wise not to allow that.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I don't know why. And in the US the standards are quite a bit higher for this sort of charge. As to the fight it looks more like an example of "mutual combat". If two men get into a fight with each other it is vey hard to sue the other for damages. There is of course to show that it was two sided this quote from Unsworth:

"During an interview with CNN, the diver suggested the billionaire "stick his submarine where it hurts"."

Now does that sound very nice? I don't think that the JDART was even needed by Musk (by the way Google recognized that acronym). Musk could not sue for a threat of physical violence. It works both ways here.

They tried to have the trial set in London where the laws are not so lax as they are here, but I see that he failed at that. Different countries, different laws and standards. Musk was probably wise not to allow that.

To what extent are U.S. laws lax about libel and defamation? For instance, per the OP, could someone be convicted for defamation if they tweeted that another person was a "pedo" without the exchange being mutually insulting as was the case between Musk and Unsworth?

If a country's laws have no mechanism to prevent public accusations that could considerably harm someone's reputation or, say, their career, then it sounds like said laws are quite faulty. I hope this is not the case with U.S. laws regarding defamation.

 

[stvdv]

New Reading about the defamation case involving Elon Musk and Vernon Unsworth has made me wonder: is calling someone a "pedophile" in a public space or on a public platform, such as Twitter, illegal in the U.S. or not?

Excerpted for some context on the case:

Good to hear, this seems fair to me.

 

[Suave]

I'm not sure what your point is. I think the Tweet was thoughtless and petty as well, but I'm asking about the legal aspect thereof.

Three events must transpire for slander to legally occur within most U.S. jurisdictions.

1) An unsubstantiated accusation must be made about a person. ( i.e.,- claiming somebody is a pedophile most certainly fits this category)

2) Other people besides the slanderer and the slandered must be aware of this allegation, the slanderer must slander the slandered in a public forum or public place.

3) Definable harm must be borne by the slandered individual on account of other people's awareness of the slander. This damage typically is economic (i.e.- the slandered becomes unemployed or looses business due to the slanderer, or social -( i.e. the slandered individual was unfriended by many acquaintances.) Of course, the degrading social status is harder to prove in a court of law.)

I know all this, because of a slandered close acquaintance of mine who was contemplating suing a slanderer calling the slandered a pedophile. However, the slandered could neither prove his unemployment status was due to being slandered nor could he prove his social status was degraded by the slanderer,

 

[Subduction Zone]

To what extent are U.S. laws lax about libel and defamation? For instance, per the OP, could someone be convicted for defamation if they tweeted that another person was a "pedo" without the exchange being mutually insulting as was the case between Musk and Unsworth?

If a country's laws have no mechanism to prevent public accusations that could considerably harm someone's reputation or, say, their career, then it sounds like said laws are quite faulty. I hope this is not the case with U.S. laws regarding defamation.

The opinion in the articles was the the laws are more strict in England. I could not say much more than that. I have no personal knowledge about this.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Good to hear, this seems fair to me.

Do you believe no libel occurred here? And if so, how come? Or are you against libel laws in general?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Three events must transpire for slander to legally occur within most U.S. jurisdictions.

1) An unsubstantiated accusation must be made about a person. ( i.e.,- claiming somebody is a pedophile most certainly fits this category)

2) Other people besides the slanderer and the slandered must be aware of this allegation, the slanderer must slander the slandered in a public forum or public place.

3) Definable harm must be borne by the slandered individual on account of other people's awareness of the slander. This damage typically is economic (i.e.- the slandered becomes unemployed or loses business de to the slanderer, or social - i.e. the slandered individual was unfriended by many acquaintances.) Of course, the degrading social status is harder to prove in a court of law.)

I know all this, because of a slandered close acquaintance of mine who was contemplating suing a slanderer calling the slandered a pedophile. However, the slandered could neither prove his unemployment status was due to being slandered nor could he prove his social status was degraded by the slanderer,

How would one go about proving that they were fired from their job or that their social status was damaged due to the slander? That seems quite complicated, especially since any company can release employees and cite unrelated reasons as a facade in such a case.

How is your acquaintance doing now, if you don't mind my asking?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you believe no libel occurred here? And if so, how come? Or are you against libel laws in general?

You did not ask me, but I would say no. It is like the mutual combat example that I gave earlier. Both of them dove into it. If it was only one sided then he would have had a much better case.

 

[Debater Slayer]

You did not ask me, but I would say no. It is like the mutual combat example that I gave earlier. Both of them dove into it. If it was only one sided then he would have had a much better case.

I definitely hope that any innocent person being targeted by such an accusation while being respectful has legal recourse and can have a ruling in their favor under U.S. law.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I definitely hope that any innocent person being targeted by such an accusation while being respectful has legal recourse and can have a ruling in their favor under U.S. law.

He does. But that is not what happened in this case.

 

[Debater Slayer]

He does. But that is not what happened in this case.

I can see strong merit to the argument that this was a mutual exchange of insults, but the email to the Buzzfeed reporter is what's mainly giving me pause here. It makes it seem that Musk was serious, and I'm quite curious why said email didn't elicit a longer deliberation from the jury.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I can see strong merit to the argument that this was a mutual exchange of insults, but the email to the Buzzfeed reporter is what's mainly giving me pause here. It makes it seem that Musk was serious, and I'm quite curious why said email didn't elicit a longer deliberation from the jury.

Once one enters into mutual combat the arena can get quite large. The submarine in the the butt comment occurred with a CNN interview. They were both all over the place. I would like to see all of the tweets that occurred between the two of them. I bet that the jury did.

 

[Suave]

How would one go about proving that they were fired from their job or that their social status was damaged due to the slander? That seems quite complicated, especially since any company can release employees and cite unrelated reasons as a facade in such a case.

How is your acquaintance doing now, if you don't mind my asking?

You would be correct to note that slander is most often a non-prosecutorial offense as the slandered cannot easily prove how much he was harmed by the slanderer,

My slandered friend has overcome being slandered, He has since become a modestly successful day trader after loosing his shuttle driver job amid the pandemic, He moved away from his ex-wife in Illinois and he is now staying with his brother in Nebraska. His taste in women has matured a bit,