Christian Horner under Investigation

[Watto]

If the KC found wrong doing and its as obvious as that why has their been no leaks of the report plenty of other things are leaked in all this etc. Granted I get there are reasons but take it at face value for a moment

AIUI the board commissioned the report so it would be prepared and presented to the board directly. The only other people who may have access to it would be their secretaries.

The limited circulation means that either the report hasn't reached the leaker, or that it would make it too obvious where the leak is coming from so the leaker isn't risking it. If the report leaked internally, via a secretary or a hard copy being left in the bin rather than shredded for instance, then we may see it eventually. I suspect we're unlikely to ever see it.

In context to all that is going on though?

The Austrian side of RB GmbH wants Horner removed he doesn’t have unanimous support.

Yoovidhya has a 51% controlling share and can likely do what ever he wants. Him wanting to move Red Bull Technology out of Red Bull GmbH into a seperate company, an unhappy board member is how this stuff usually leaks. Enough people with motive would likely have seen the report, if being held up by Yoodiniya controlling stake finding wrong doings ignored by the 51% owner.


Anyway read his article again I wonder if he’s throwing a few hints out? Is Horner getting a little frisky with the PA. Gives a yes, but also makes a reference to tools to help generate fake conversations does he know something or is he just hypothesizing most of his article he seems to be hinting towards details he sees as fact. He didn’t really question at all if there was something between them nor that it’s probably not a great idea. Is he giving a hint that some of the messages are falsely generated?

The blog in general reads as someone with a source and using what he knows (well has been told could be mislead obviously.

Argue he should sue? Can you sue over an internal interview seems unlikely? The leaker you’d have to know who leaked it - Joe again makes a reference to the leaker being sued if they find out who it is, the media hadn’t published the actual convo that I’ve seen just referencing it. There would be lawyer better than I that would know on that especially if there are elements of truth in it.

[quote=Watto post_id=<a href="tel:1196153">1196153</a> time=<a href="tel:1709696715">1709696715</a> user_id=44569]
[quote=PlatinumZealot post_id=<a href="tel:1196145">1196145</a> time=<a href="tel:1709693239">1709693239</a> user_id=6109]
Gawd! I went over the leaked screenshots again and boy they are really over the top looking back on them now. Many women go into those positions half-expecting this sort of forward behaviour, but this is not far off a Harvey Weinstein sort of deal.

The part where he said how hot she made him on the plane to Dubai and he wanted her to "finish him off" in the restroom is pretty much unacceptable for a professional, even if in jest. Then asking a few times for a photos before bed and in the morning. A declined video chat right before she was about to take a shower, and prompts for her to hear "his fireball" whatever that is...then reminders of how hot she looks in spandex etc.. Appears to be your textbook workplace sexual harassment case - and it is a slam dunk if these images are genuine (I think they are).

These "interactions" seemed to happen outside of working hours away from the work site. Obviously he's texting form places where he's comfortable and away from the bustle and eyes of coworkers... late nights, pool side.. One might think he would get away with this, but this i not so. He is still liable for work related sexual harrassment ... https://www.getimpactly.com/post/sexual ... tside-work

I haven't bothered going over al of them just what has been easy to find online. And agree from what I saw seems solid grounds for being sacked. One of the interesting points bought by Joe in the comments below his article as he seems to have some connections to all this - probably more on the CH/Thai side though I'd think knowing about Yoovidhya plans to remove Red Bull Technology out of Red Bull GmbH into a separate company's control. If the KC found wrong doing and its as obvious as that why has their been no leaks of the report plenty of other things are leaked in all this etc. Granted I get there are reasons but take it at face value for a moment
[/quote]
Also very interested in this as well. So if Yoovidhya moved RBT out of RB gmbh...would that mean that the RB gmbh won't profit from the car manufacturers side if it did happen?
[/quote]
Depends how Yoovidhya set it up I’d imagine RbGmbH may own say a 30% share like Mercedes.

Sell and retain a non voting rights - share in the profits but not have a say in their operation.


Selll in its entirety but maybe a sponsor agreement.

The 2 owners of RBGmbH would get the profits of the sale.

The talk of Horner with some British investors taking a stake.

[Watto]

Apologies if I’ve missed the link, but Joe Saward’s written an interesting piece on the whole affair: https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2024/03 ... y-weekend/

Worth reading the comments, too.

Good read and very unbiased. Thanks for that

I thought that on first read, but I read it again and think he misses the mark.

He seems more bothered that somebody leaked the screenshots, than that a CEO had an affair with a subordinate, then continued to pressure her for pictures, phone calls to aid his masturbation, and to delete the evidence of this.

Secondly he says the "investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing" ... we actually have no evidence that is the case. All the statement actually said was : "the grievance has been dismissed". That does not confirm that there was "no evidence of wrongdoing", it also doesn't tell us what the KC actually reported/recommended to Red Bull.
All it says is that the investigation is complete and that Red Bull dismissed the grievance.

he clears up a few things in him the comments he did consider the wording of the release etc not that I don’t completely disagree he glossed over it a little I do wonder - and am guessing only if he’s left a few hints in the article as I posted above, seems very much he has a source and mostly reads in details he has been told over what he’s guessing

[littlebigcat]

I thought the Saware article was good, but his comments do reveal his bias and naivety.

[Watto]

I thought the Saware article was good, but his comments do reveal his bias and naivety.

There isn’t a person in this whole saga that isn’t showing some bias and agree he has some here too there is a grain of salt element to if but his comments section he opened up a little more - his sister , Jill, a rape victim was the first person in the Uk to have their name published, she then became a sexual assault advocate, so would read it as an area he had some knowledge of

[littlebigcat]

Yes I was aware of that, but his experience there doesn’t apply here. Sexual violence isn’t being considered here.

[Watto]

Yes I was aware of that, but his experience there doesn’t apply here. Sexual violence isn’t being considered here.

still not a subject too far away though. I doubt he makes light of sexual harassment particularly as lewd as some of the messages are.

By all means he like anyone in all this has some bias and can only write in what he knows and he did forecast ahead of most there is way more to come of this story.

[Farnborough]

Its all over, this topic, in tabloid land UK as of today

Speculative release of apparently private photos of Prince Harry naked, the full nuptials etc has taken front page..... this the way of the world

Could be a hedging headline "Prince Harry Bollix Trumps Horner & Spice while Toto sits Biden his time to sign Max"

Just about covers most interest points of the day.

Maybe I could get a job within the press agency

[Watto]

Its all over, this topic, in tabloid land UK as of today

Speculative release of apparently private photos of Prince Harry naked, the full nuptials etc has taken front page..... this the way of the world

Could be a hedging headline "Prince Harry Bollix Trumps Horner & Spice while Toto sits Biden his time to sign Max"

Just about covers most interest points of the day.

Maybe I could get a job within the press agency

just saw the news when you posted that. Never a dull day in media land is there.

[myurr]

Anyway read his article again I wonder if he’s throwing a few hints out? Is Horner getting a little frisky with the PA. Gives a yes, but also makes a reference to tools to help generate fake conversations does he know something or is he just hypothesizing most of his article he seems to be hinting towards details he sees as fact. He didn’t really question at all if there was something between them nor that it’s probably not a great idea. Is he giving a hint that some of the messages are falsely generated?

I read the article and there's a couple of things that jump out. I've read some of Joe's stuff before, and whilst he usually has a pretty dry writing style it's clear he does have good connections in the paddock. I haven't read enough of his stuff to know where his allegiances lie / which parts of the paddock he's reliant upon for future access and stories.

Yes messages are easily generated, but there is no evidence that they have been here and plenty of evidence that the timeline and details match.

It's interesting that he dates it as March 2023 to January 2024. That is certainly an extended period of time.

He alludes to the victim saving the messages from the start, but his reasoning is false in my view. He says "Quite a few of these screenshots included the notations “CH online” or “CH typing”. This meant that the pictures were taken during a live conversation and not later when someone was going through the conversations looking for things to include in this dossier." It doesn't mean that at all.

It means that Horner was sending her messages whilst she was taking the screenshots. For instance he could have sent one of the messages that was clearly bothering the victim and she decided that enough was enough so started scrolling back through the messages to take the screenshots. That Horner was still typing has no bearing on her scroll position, and just means he was messaging her at the time she saved them.

There's also the evidence that several of the screenshots are in reverse order, where earlier files are taken further into the conversation, then she scrolls back further and takes another screenshot. That is more indicative of someone going back through the messages than saving them as they are sent.

He also seems to ignore that whilst some of the early flirting may be okay and consensual, whilst having feelings for each other can be complex and you can't help who you fall for, she very clearly asked him to stop and he did not comply. That is the point where flirting crosses into sexual harassment, and it becomes a sure fire breach of employment law where it is a manager harassing a subordinate.

Having re-read the messages I think it's relatively clear that the victim and Horner had / have strong feelings for each other, but that the victim was unable to reconcile having a relationship with Horner with him remaining in his marriage to Geri and ostensibly being happy. She outright tells him that if he's unhappy with Geri then he should tell her. Horner never does, he wants to have his cake and eat it, so the victim withdrew her consent and asked him to stop. She didn't stop caring about him but she wanted a complete relationship with him (or to find someone else) rather than an affair. Horner wanted a bit on the side whilst he was travelling the world, and he continued to try and coerce the victim into giving him what he wanted. The point that really crossed the line in a major way, for me, was his reference to giving her a way out and her replying that she didn't want to leave her job.

Joe seems to be discounting the harassment side of the story either because he thinks the victim was always out to trap him in some way (hence questioning saving the messages), or because he thinks having feelings for each other grants automatic consent. I hope that I'm misreading his intention and that's not how he actually feels.

He goes on to allude to the leaks coming from someone high up in the Austrian side of Red Bull GmbH, which I take to mean Mintzlaff.

I don't know if Joe has connections to Horner or has access to more concrete information than we do, but it does read like he's been fed at least some information by Horner or those sympathetic to him. In the comments Joe also says that he takes the KC's investigation at face value and that Horner was cleared, for me that means you need to take the rest of his conclusions with a pinch of salt.

[Watto]

Anyway read his article again I wonder if he’s throwing a few hints out? Is Horner getting a little frisky with the PA. Gives a yes, but also makes a reference to tools to help generate fake conversations does he know something or is he just hypothesizing most of his article he seems to be hinting towards details he sees as fact. He didn’t really question at all if there was something between them nor that it’s probably not a great idea. Is he giving a hint that some of the messages are falsely generated?

I read the article and there's a couple of things that jump out. I've read some of Joe's stuff before, and whilst he usually has a pretty dry writing style it's clear he does have good connections in the paddock. I haven't read enough of his stuff to know where his allegiances lie / which parts of the paddock he's reliant upon for future access and stories.

Yes messages are easily generated, but there is no evidence that they have been here and plenty of evidence that the timeline and details match.

It's interesting that he dates it as March 2023 to January 2024. That is certainly an extended period of time.

He alludes to the victim saving the messages from the start, but his reasoning is false in my view. He says "Quite a few of these screenshots included the notations “CH online” or “CH typing”. This meant that the pictures were taken during a live conversation and not later when someone was going through the conversations looking for things to include in this dossier." It doesn't mean that at all.

It means that Horner was sending her messages whilst she was taking the screenshots. For instance he could have sent one of the messages that was clearly bothering the victim and she decided that enough was enough so started scrolling back through the messages to take the screenshots. That Horner was still typing has no bearing on her scroll position, and just means he was messaging her at the time she saved them.

There's also the evidence that several of the screenshots are in reverse order, where earlier files are taken further into the conversation, then she scrolls back further and takes another screenshot. That is more indicative of someone going back through the messages than saving them as they are sent.

He also seems to ignore that whilst some of the early flirting may be okay and consensual, whilst having feelings for each other can be complex and you can't help who you fall for, she very clearly asked him to stop and he did not comply. That is the point where flirting crosses into sexual harassment, and it becomes a sure fire breach of employment law where it is a manager harassing a subordinate.

Having re-read the messages I think it's relatively clear that the victim and Horner had / have strong feelings for each other, but that the victim was unable to reconcile having a relationship with Horner with him remaining in his marriage to Geri and ostensibly being happy. She outright tells him that if he's unhappy with Geri then he should tell her. Horner never does, he wants to have his cake and eat it, so the victim withdrew her consent and asked him to stop. She didn't stop caring about him but she wanted a complete relationship with him (or to find someone else) rather than an affair. Horner wanted a bit on the side whilst he was travelling the world, and he continued to try and coerce the victim into giving him what he wanted. The point that really crossed the line in a major way, for me, was his reference to giving her a way out and her replying that she didn't want to leave her job.

Joe seems to be discounting the harassment side of the story either because he thinks the victim was always out to trap him in some way (hence questioning saving the messages), or because he thinks having feelings for each other grants automatic consent. I hope that I'm misreading his intention and that's not how he actually feels.

He goes on to allude to the leaks coming from someone high up in the Austrian side of Red Bull GmbH, which I take to mean Mintzlaff.

I don't know if Joe has connections to Horner or has access to more concrete information than we do, but it does read like he's been fed at least some information by Horner or those sympathetic to him. In the comments Joe also says that he takes the KC's investigation at face value and that Horner was cleared, for me that means you need to take the rest of his conclusions with a pinch of salt.

Don’t disagree with a lot of this Joe clearly has a Horner alignment source. And I do that that with a grain of salt as I do with any leak/article.

And agree too I’ve seen people to analyse the screenshots of the message both ways in the end it’s equally meaningless. Without knowing more either having someone forensically go through them no real conclusions can me meet with 100 % accuracy I don’t think anyone outside those involved will know the truth you only need to look at Bill Clinton’s denials for one as proof men will lie about such thing.

[mendis]

Apologies if I’ve missed the link, but Joe Saward’s written an interesting piece on the whole affair: https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2024/03 ... y-weekend/

Worth reading the comments, too.

In my opinion, it's a very sensible piece. Like he said in the piece, the lynch mob might not like that take.

I didn't know it was British King’s Counsel (A KC (or QC if the monarch is female) is one of a small group of the most eminent British lawyers, recognised for their excellence. Being given KC status is an honour. It is not a rank. These people are smart, fair, honest and intellectually brilliant. ) that handled the investigation.

There is so much rotten in this whole saga of leaks on internal investigation, then leaking the chats purported to be genuine and then barking job assigned to Jos to publicly humiliate Horner who cleared that investigation.

I also concur with this statement.

If Max does leave Red Bull, the team will take another hit, but if the goal is to take the Red Bull Technology division out of the Red Bull empire, it will be no more than collateral damage. If the top seat at Red Bull becomes available, there will be no shortage of candidates.

Jos Verstappen is many things, but he isn’t naive. Is it really in the best interest of the Verstappens to move Max out of the most successful team? And why would any other team take on a driver, no matter how good he is, who would bring this kind of baggage with him?

It has become abundantly clear that the core issue here is the attempt of separating Red Bull Racing out of Red Bull GmbH. Someone in GmbH doesn't like it and on a witch hunt to terminate Horner who is leading those efforts. First it was internal investigation, then the chat leak and then Jos barking out openly about things he has no business in.

[CHT]

Apologies if I’ve missed the link, but Joe Saward’s written an interesting piece on the whole affair: https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2024/03 ... y-weekend/

Worth reading the comments, too.

In my opinion, it's a very sensible piece. Like he said in the piece, the lynch mob might not like that take.

I didn't know it was British King’s Counsel (A KC (or QC if the monarch is female) is one of a small group of the most eminent British lawyers, recognised for their excellence. Being given KC status is an honour. It is not a rank. These people are smart, fair, honest and intellectually brilliant. ) that handled the investigation.

There is so much rotten in this whole saga of leaks on internal investigation, then leaking the chats purported to be genuine and then barking job assigned to Jos to publicly humiliate Horner who cleared that investigation.

I also concur with this statement.

If Max does leave Red Bull, the team will take another hit, but if the goal is to take the Red Bull Technology division out of the Red Bull empire, it will be no more than collateral damage. If the top seat at Red Bull becomes available, there will be no shortage of candidates.

Jos Verstappen is many things, but he isn’t naive. Is it really in the best interest of the Verstappens to move Max out of the most successful team? And why would any other team take on a driver, no matter how good he is, who would bring this kind of baggage with him?

It has become abundantly clear that the core issue here is the attempt of separating Red Bull Racing out of Red Bull GmbH. Someone in GmbH doesn't like it and on a witch hunt to terminate Horner who is leading those efforts. First it was internal investigation, then the chat leak and then Jos barking out openly about things he has no business in.

lynch mob - a group of angry people who attack or try to destroy something or someone

[mendis]

Apologies if I’ve missed the link, but Joe Saward’s written an interesting piece on the whole affair: https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2024/03 ... y-weekend/

Worth reading the comments, too.

In my opinion, it's a very sensible piece. Like he said in the piece, the lynch mob might not like that take.

I didn't know it was British King’s Counsel (A KC (or QC if the monarch is female) is one of a small group of the most eminent British lawyers, recognised for their excellence. Being given KC status is an honour. It is not a rank. These people are smart, fair, honest and intellectually brilliant. ) that handled the investigation.

There is so much rotten in this whole saga of leaks on internal investigation, then leaking the chats purported to be genuine and then barking job assigned to Jos to publicly humiliate Horner who cleared that investigation.

I also concur with this statement.

If Max does leave Red Bull, the team will take another hit, but if the goal is to take the Red Bull Technology division out of the Red Bull empire, it will be no more than collateral damage. If the top seat at Red Bull becomes available, there will be no shortage of candidates.

Jos Verstappen is many things, but he isn’t naive. Is it really in the best interest of the Verstappens to move Max out of the most successful team? And why would any other team take on a driver, no matter how good he is, who would bring this kind of baggage with him?

It has become abundantly clear that the core issue here is the attempt of separating Red Bull Racing out of Red Bull GmbH. Someone in GmbH doesn't like it and on a witch hunt to terminate Horner who is leading those efforts. First it was internal investigation, then the chat leak and then Jos barking out openly about things he has no business in.

lynch mob - a group of angry people who attack or try to destroy something or someone

Definitions are always fluidic isn't it. If Joe thinks that's what some people are doing in this situation (pushing out Horner by hook or crook), then it's his opinion.

[Watto]

Apologies if I’ve missed the link, but Joe Saward’s written an interesting piece on the whole affair: https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2024/03 ... y-weekend/

Worth reading the comments, too.

In my opinion, it's a very sensible piece. Like he said in the piece, the lynch mob might not like that take.

I didn't know it was British King’s Counsel (A KC (or QC if the monarch is female) is one of a small group of the most eminent British lawyers, recognised for their excellence. Being given KC status is an honour. It is not a rank. These people are smart, fair, honest and intellectually brilliant. ) that handled the investigation.

There is so much rotten in this whole saga of leaks on internal investigation, then leaking the chats purported to be genuine and then barking job assigned to Jos to publicly humiliate Horner who cleared that investigation.

I also concur with this statement.

If Max does leave Red Bull, the team will take another hit, but if the goal is to take the Red Bull Technology division out of the Red Bull empire, it will be no more than collateral damage. If the top seat at Red Bull becomes available, there will be no shortage of candidates.

Jos Verstappen is many things, but he isn’t naive. Is it really in the best interest of the Verstappens to move Max out of the most successful team? And why would any other team take on a driver, no matter how good he is, who would bring this kind of baggage with him?

It has become abundantly clear that the core issue here is the attempt of separating Red Bull Racing out of Red Bull GmbH. Someone in GmbH doesn't like it and on a witch hunt to terminate Horner who is leading those efforts. First it was internal investigation, then the chat leak and then Jos barking out openly about things he has no business in.

I’m very much in the if the messages are genuine CH should be removed. And tend to think they likly are both the changing nature of the investigation and the various leaks/attacks on Horner seem a classic smear campaign. That there are just too many elements to this whole story where there seems way to much going on to know exactly what’s true or not I’m hugely skeptical on what’s been released/said on all sides

[vorticism]

*motorsport engineering noises*