Has Max been a verryyy naughty boy?

[WhiteBlue]

In the high court case of Max Mosly versus the NoTW Justice Eady had a preliminary hearing. With Mosley cleared to claim exemplary damages there is little doubt that the Nazi connotation was a fabrication of the NoTW. It will be interesting to see how the damages will be set next week.

AMS gave an update with interesting information on the expected revelations for next week. As the article is in German I provide a translation of the relevant paragraf.

Mosley knows identity of his enemies

In the struggle for power in Formula 1 it becomes crucial who holds the better cards. Mosley will pull his Joker on 7 July, when the law suit against the magazine “News of the World” goes to the high court. With their publication NoTW kicked off the sex scandal of the president of the FIA. Mosley claims he has proof that the editors of the magazine consciously trapped him, in order to expose him publicly. He also knows, who ordered the observation aimed at pushing him out of his FIA office.

The secret identity of the backers is to be unveiled before court. The other side was not idle as well. Rumors are spreading that further embarassing material is about to be published against Mosley. At least that is what one can make of the suggestion of one the Mosley opponent? “The time will show, what else is going to come to light.”

8th July

more evidence emerges that the Nazi claim is a fabrication.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/ju ... tworkfront

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080708/wl ... essgermany


edit 9th July:

after three days in court a number of facts have emerged that are worth documenting

• the Chelsea appartment was rented by woman A for Mosley
• there were two SM sex parties held in with basically the same participants in one month
• woman A was organizing the events and had been known to Mosley for 2 years
• all women were known to each other and trusted each other
• woman E was using rooms in woman A's house in Milton Keynes for her SM sessions
• woman A was married to the MI5 officer
• woman E was send to the party by Neville Thurlbeck of NoTW with a mirco cam and instructions to film Mosley doing the Nazi salutation implying that NoTW was very keen for Nazi footage
• the other women all denied that any NS theme was intended
• NoTW intentionally invaded Mosley's privacy by taking hidden video in his rented appartment without his consent and knowledge

My impression from this reflects very negatively on the paper. Nothing of the SM party was recorded or published by woman A and Mosley. They went to great length to ensure everything was private and no aspect of public access was present. The invasion of privacy by NoTW is obvious. Also obvious is the pre meditated objective of getting NS themed material of Mosley by this invasion. Of the six persons present at the party five gave testimony that no NS connotation was intended or enacted. Only woman E - the agent of NoTW - was interested in recording NS content for commercial purposes.

I'm sure there will be more relevations in the next days but the core of the case seems fairly clear already. The paper induced one group member of the private party to break the faith and betray the others by clandestine video filming and publishing private content. The betrayal by E is considerable having in mind that she was intimately befriended with woman A who had taken her into her house. NoTW had no justification to use such subvertive tactics because there was no public interest in Mosley's private sex life. Quite contrary the public generally wants acts of sexuality to be kept in the private domain. This unjustified breach of privacy is agravated by the reporting of a Nazi role play that was not established by the facts. I expect justice Eady to find against NoTW and also to decide for punative damages.

One other aspect that hasn't been touched by the various witnesses is the involvement of other conspirators with NoTW. I had expected Mosley to push that issue. I do not believe for one moment that NoTW has acted without any connection to the power struggle that went on in F1 at the same time. Unless NewsCorp had an interest in the affair it was very unlikely that the paper was spending considerable sums of money to run an investigation that covered several months. NoTW surely had no "unlimited" budget for a typical sex story. There is testimony in the public domain that such unlimited spending was authorised by the sponsors behind the observation.

This silence would be strange if the power struggle had continued. As it stands the side opposing Mosley - which involved Ecclestone at some time - have moved to make peace prior to the court date. This would probably indicate that outsiders will miss the chance to learn a bit more about the machinations going on behind the scene. We will probably have to wait much longer to learn some of Bernies secrets, which is a pity in my view.

edit 24 July:

Max likely to get hundred thausends of $ from Newscorp for NotW lies

[ben_watkins]

Mad Max wins - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/p ... sgroup.pdf

Still we all know he's a dirty perv now.. Shame for his wife and kids.

[WhiteBlue]

We know that he has an excentric sexual habit and that he has been the victim of a diffamation campaign which was most likely driven by enemies from F1.

It is good to see that disgusting dirt throwers like Newscorp's News of the World Neville Thurlbeck has to pay for their irresponsible lies and intrusions. The $ 120,000 to the FIA foundation is only a small amount in terms of damages but it carries some symbolic means. It shows that the paper was absolutely wrong in what they did. The total cost to Newscorp will most likey be two million $ because they have to pay the whole law suit. Hopefully that will make a nice dent into their bottom line this year and will be felt in the pockets of Thurlbeck and the editor Myler. These guysreally are the scum of the newspaper business.

It is a bit disappointing that the court wasn't told who was behind the whole affair. Obviously the parties involved have settled that issue behind closed doors before the proceedings. But as such things go it is likely to come out one day and not to the advantage of those involved.

One additional information that came out of the law suit was the role of Mistress Abi's MI5 husband. He was the one who called News of the World and together with Thurlbeck arranged the surveillance camery for the sting. I think it is no coincidence that this person is from the Silverstone / Milton Keynes area where the bulk of the F1 teams have their factories. It makes it more likely than ever that interested parties in F1 have set the whole thing up to advance their own agenda.

[mcdenife]

Whiteblue stop polluting the forum with this speculative-opinion-presented-as-fact analysis. Max is a perverted nazi fascist regardless of whatever the judge says, end of story. Now please give it a rest.

[WhiteBlue]

Whiteblue stop polluting the forum with this speculative-opinion-presented-as-fact analysis. Max is a perverted nazi fascist regardless of whatever the judge says, end of story. Now please give it a rest.

Mcdenife, it is your post that is pollutive and you have no point to stand on. Justice Eady has delivered a thourogh ruling of more than 230 points which I recommend you to read before you continue to make such unfounded accusations.

Of course the whole thing will be subject to discussions here in the forum as it relates obviously to the ongoing power play in F1. If you cannot see this, one can easily come to the conclusion that you are party to those who defame and do wrong to further the agenda of Mosley's enemies. That actually appears quite likely from your stance.

Do not believe that you can suppress legitimate opinion and facts by demagoge language. You will read here and at other places of free speech and writing what happens and what I think of it.


Neville Thurlbeck: the judge in the Max Mosley case said there were 'undoubtedly inconsistencies' in the reporter's evidence.

News of the World reporter under fire from judge in Max Mosley case
Leigh Holmwood guardian.co.uk, Thursday July 24, 2008

Mr Justice Eady today criticised the News of the World chief reporter, Neville Thurlbeck, in his judgment, saying the journalist gave "erratic and changeable" evidence.

The judge said there were "undoubtedly inconsistencies" in Thurlbeck's testimony which made it "very difficult to decide how much can be relied upon".

Formula one boss Mosley was awarded £60,000 after winning his privacy action against the Sunday tabloid following its false claims that he had taken part in a "sick Nazi orgy".

In his high court judgment, Eady criticised Thurlbeck's performance on the witness stand when the veteran reporter attempted to explain how he first came to understand there would be a "Nazi theme" to Mosley's sex session following discussions he had with Woman E, who was to film the meeting, and her husband.

Eady said Thurlbeck's attempt to back up his witness statement that Woman E had been "under the impression that the sex party would consist of sadomasochistic acts but played out as a part of Nazi role play" was "hard to swallow".

Under cross-examination by Mosley's QC, James Price, Eady said Thurlbeck had attempted to "firm this up", but "in a way that was especially unconvincing".

In his summing-up, Price accused Thurlbeck of making up evidence in the witness box, but Eady did not conclude this was the case.

"These points might perhaps bear upon the claim for exemplary damages, or support a general observation that this was not consistent with 'responsible journalism', but I think their primary relevance is as to the credibility of Thurlbeck and, to a degree, of [News of the World editor Colin] Myler," Eady said.

"It is necessary to have regard to these responses when considering to what extent the answers given to the court and to Mr Price can be regarded as frank.

"The real problem, so far as Thurlbeck is concerned, is that these inconsistencies demonstrate that his 'best recollection' is so erratic and changeable that it would not be safe to place unqualified reliance on his evidence as to what took place as between him, Woman E and her husband."

In a separate section of his judgment, Eady said emails sent by Thurlbeck to the women involved in the Mosley sex session trying to get them to sell their stories appeared to "contain a clear threat … that unless they cooperated with Mr Thurlbeck (albeit in exchange for some money) their identities would be revealed on the following Sunday."

When Myler was questioned about the emails during his testimony, he admitted they "could be interpreted as a threat".

Eady said that this "seemed to fall short of a wholesale endorsement of his chief reporter's behaviour".

Elsewhere in the ruling, the judge criticised the fact that a translation was not sought for the German spoken on the Mosley sex video and that the tape was "not properly checked" for Nazi content.

"Those concerned were simply content to rely on general impression (looking at it 'in the round') [that there was 'Nazi connotations']," he said.

"That is hardly satisfactory having regard to the devastating impact the publication would have on all those involved and to the gravity of the allegations - especially that of mocking the treatment given to concentration camp inmates."

Thank you Ben Watkins for posting the PDF to the full ruling of justice Eady in Mosley vs Newscorp.

I am quite impressed by the piece of legal study that has gone into reconciling the freedom of press and the freedom of keeping ones sex life private.

As it stands Thurlbeck and Myler have completely disgraced themselves as responsible media men. Inconsistencies is a legal nicety for lying. The only public interest that Thurlbeck and Myler satisfy is on the moral level of those that buy pornografic magazines. Thurlbeck was caught lying and fabricating the Nazi Theme. Myler has publicly declared that he doesn't care if his reporters blackmail witnesses and fabricate stories as long as he has no risk of loosing profit.

Justice Eady deserves some praise for clarifying what you can do and not do when you are discrediting enemies via the yellow press. Obviously this will not bring back Mosley's reputation but it justifies the decision by the FIA to let him finish his term in office. Hopefully the time will be well spent denying those who set him up the fruits of their wrong doings.

a pritty good essay in the guardian why investigative journalism of serious issues isn't threatened by the ruling. Kiss and tell tabloid business may suffer. But who will shed a tear?

[John Stitch]

Whiteblue stop polluting the forum with this speculative-opinion-presented-as-fact analysis. Max is a perverted nazi fascist regardless of whatever the judge says, end of story. Now please give it a rest.

Many have tried, you will not be the last, my advice is to let him continue in his own little world.

[WhiteBlue]

LOL, John. You are quick to welcome scandal and calls for resignation. When it comes to looking into details and what really happened you are not interested. You are not alone in that.

[mcdenife]

Whiteblue wrote: Mcdenife, it is your post that is pollutive and you have no point to stand on. Justice Eady has delivered a thourogh ruling of more than 230 points which I recommend you to read before you continue to make such unfounded accusations.

Of course the whole thing will be subject to discussions here in the forum as it relates obviously to the ongoing power play in F1. If you cannot see this, one can easily come to the conclusion that you are party to those who defame and do wrong to further the agenda of Mosley's enemies. That actually appears quite likely from your stance.

"Party to what?" I read somewhere that you have Phd or something. what was it in? it must be something like "crassness and stupidity" because only a pedantic dimwit, who cant tell his elbow from his left butt cheek, will make a statement like that. I think you need stop and take a deep breath before writing or at the very least reconnect the link between your fingers and your brain (assuming you have one)

Dont you get it or can you not see that nobody is 'discussing' No one else is saying or interested in the "230 points". Perhaps it has escaped your attention that the forum members can read (they must in order to participate, dont you think?).
If they were interested in the "230 points" they will read it and invariably form the own opinions.

[Chaparral]

Thank you mcdenife & John Stitch I'm pissing myself reading this last couple of pages of this thread - you guys are correct WB is a seasoned spammer of all things that add up to nothing (a German Sienfeld) - it was one of the reasons he was so disliked and eventually banned from another forum - --- me talk about conspiracy theories he'd have you believe the Catholic church organised a hit on JFK - your correct - leave him in his own little world he hasnt a clue of what he's talking about - its amusing however (in small doses)

[WhiteBlue]

attack the post and not the poster is all I have to say to you guys. You are not contributing to the issue. you are just looking for an outlet for your hate. Everybody can see that. No need for further comment.

[mcdenife]

attack the post and not the poster is all I have to say to you guys. You are not contributing to the issue. you are just looking for an outlet for your hate. Everybody can see that. No need for further comment.

We have gone way past that when you make comments like this:

If you cannot see this, one can easily come to the conclusion that you are party to those who defame and do wrong to further the agenda of Mosley's enemies. That actually appears quite likely from your stance.

.
I repeat, my opinion of Max is that he is a perverted Nazi fascist. You make comments like that, force your opinions on others, more or less hijack this forum and have the gall to say
"attack the post and not the poster ".

[WhiteBlue]

Everybody is entitled to an opinion. The problem of mcdenife is that his opinion about Max Mosley cannot be reconsiled with the facts established by the high court. But perhaps he is in posession of some private intelligence that he shares with other people who hate Mosley.

[bazanaius]

We all dislike people, often for irrational reasons, and more often for reasons that other people can't understand.
On this occasion I'd say it's pretty understandable why currently I dislike the people posting in this thread. I'm here to discuss the technicalities of F1, as I find the engineering, tactics and other scientific areas of F1 interesting.
I understand that this is a topical political issue and does indeed affect the future of F1 and other forms of motorsport throughout the world, however I have no intention of attempting to force other people to side with my opinion on the matter, particularly not through the medium of insults on a public forum.
Please can we accept the fact that different people have different opinions on different things and move on? Particularly when this disucssion not only causes bad blood between members, but also will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the outcome of the situation.
I'm not saying don't discuss, I'm saying accept that other people have different views and allow for this before retaliating in an inpolite manner that will harm the site.
Is it possible for a mod to move this to the 'off topic' forum, as I don't feel it relates to a technical area of F1.
cheers.
B

[DaveKillens]

I agree bazanaius. Recently I have noticed that certain forum members freely toss personal insults about. I too do disagree with some, but I do not attack the poster. They are entitled to their conclusions and opinions, despite the fact those opinions may be totally contrary to mine.
In my mind, the best way to disagree is to post a convincing argument for my opinion. If that changes nothing, then that's just the way it is. I will still read their posts and act politely and respectfully to them. That's because I try to keep my ego and arrogance in check, and respect the opinions of others.

[WhiteBlue]

I do not think that this is an off topic thread. It was opened in general F1 interest and I guess it belongs here.