1/ The last time Elon Musk faced a defamation claim, he richly deserved to lose. He smeared a true hero, Vernon Unsworth, calling him a pedophile. Some might suspect projection on Musk's part...
2/ Unfortunately, Unsworth hired L. Lin Wood (I'm now blocked by Wood, but his Twitter handle is @LLinWood).
The choice was not illogical. Wood had settled many high-profile defamation cases, though it appeared he tried few, if any.
The choice was not illogical. Wood had settled many high-profile defamation cases, though it appeared he tried few, if any.
3/ Wood's work in pretrial briefing and discovery was impressive. He survived various efforts to dismiss the case, and developed a powerful body of evidence for trial.
4/ At trial, though, it was a different story. From the very start, it was almost as if Wood decided to sabotage the case. He delegated a rookie to make the opening statement. It was fumbling, stumbling, incoherent...
5/ Then, he failed to call his client as his first witness. So, instead of having Vern Unsworth establish who he was to the jury, and lay out the case in a coherent manner, Wood had Elon Musk make total hash of the facts & chronology.
6/ Did I say it was almost as if Wood decided to sabotage the case? Almost?? I can think of no other explanation. Surely he's not that incompetent, is he?
7/ Or, perhaps, Wood was in the early stages of insanity. Witness his "work" for Donald Trump. I think we can fairly credit Trump (for failing to concede graciously) and Wood (for urging a voting boycott) for the Georgia results.
8/ As for the insanity, consider this: 
9/ Just reflecting from the lake a bit, I'm thinking Wood might soon, himself, need a defamation attorney. (Sorry, Lin, insanity is not a defense to a civil defamation action.)
10/ I bring all this up because I am co-counsel (with the superb D. Gill Sperlein) on another defamation case against Elon Musk: Randeep Hothi v Elon Musk, Case No: RG20069852, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda.
11/ Musk has hired as his counsel the same, big firm lawyers as in the Unsworth case: the Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan folks, with Alex Spiro again heading up the effort. Let's give credit where due: Spiro is a splendid trial attorney (and a master of innuendo & smear).
12/ We now face in that lawsuit an "anti-SLAPP" motion. In essence, Musk claims that in accusing Hothi of harassment of $tsla employees, and almost killing several of them, he was merely exercising his First Amendment rights.
13/ Classic Musk. The thin-skinned narcissist billionaire bully has done his all to silence an effective critic, Randeep Hothi (@skabooshka), but wants to claim he, Elon Musk, is the First Amendment hero.
14/ The Quinn Emanuel firm's first move was to get rid of the presiding judge (the Honorable Evelio Grillo), whom Musk claimed was prejudiced against Tesla. Judge Grillo is highly capable & 100% fair, but California law allowed the removal without evidence or cause.
15/ That said, we are now before an equally able and fair judge. The motion likely will be decided at some point within the next month or two. I will have more details shortly.
16/ While my work is pro bono, that of my co-counsel (and his support staff) is not. I will need soon to rattle the tin can at GoFundMe for some additional help. As I said, many more details to follow soon...
17/ In the meantime, I can promise you this: if we get to trial, as I believe we deserve to and hope we will, we will do a far better job of presenting our case than did Lin Wood with Vern Unsworth's case.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
