Musk tells jury ‘people read too much’ into his posts.

Multi-billionaire technology tycoon Elon Musk asserted to a jury in California on Wednesday that stock market investors frequently overinterpret his social media pronouncements. He is currently defending himself against accusations from investors who claim he attempted to manipulate the market through a series of misleading messages preceding his 2022 acquisition of Twitter. Musk maintained that posts he published after reaching an agreement to purchase the platform were "extremely literal" and not designed to reduce the price he would ultimately pay. "I was simply speaking my mind," he stated when questioned about whether he had considered the impact of his posts, including one in which he announced his takeover plans were on hold. "People tend to read too much into things that I do," he elaborated. Throughout other segments of the trial, Musk repeatedly emphasized that his tweets accurately reflect his thoughts at any given moment. "What I think privately is what I say publicly, there’s no difference," he declared.

This dispute represents the inaugural lawsuit concerning Musk’s 2022 Twitter acquisition to proceed to trial, though his social media habits have led him into legal entanglements previously. In earlier legal battles, he successfully fended off claims that he misled Tesla investors and committed defamation through his posts. The trial, which commenced on Monday in San Francisco, is projected to last three weeks. Investors are seeking unspecified monetary damages from Musk, contending they are owed compensation due to their reliance on his allegedly misleading statements, such as his July declaration that he was "terminating" the deal. "If this was a trial on whether I’ve made stupid tweets, I’d say I’m guilty," Musk remarked at one juncture. When questioned if he had at one point informed Twitter’s board that he would "hunt them down for the rest of time," Musk did not deny the assertion. "I was pretty upset with the Twitter board because I thought they had engaged in fraud," Musk explained.

Brian Belgrave, who is spearheading the class of individual investors suing Musk, informed the court on Monday that he divested thousands of Twitter shares in July 2022, believing Musk would no longer proceed with the acquisition due to his public posts and statements. Belgrave’s sale price was lower than his initial purchase price a few months prior, and significantly less than the $54.20 per share Musk eventually agreed to pay, after the company pursued legal action to compel him to honor his initial $44 billion takeover offer. "I got screwed," Belgrave stated. "I got cheated." Following Musk’s takeover of Twitter, he rebranded the platform as X and initiated substantial changes, including significant staff reductions, the introduction of a fee for account verification, and a more relaxed approach to content moderation.

Aaron Arnzen, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, argued on Wednesday that Musk strategically pressured Twitter into accepting his takeover bid and subsequently demanded more concessions to finalize the deal. Arnzen drew a parallel to a boxing strategy where a fighter exhausts their opponent to gain an advantage, inquiring if Musk had employed a similar "rope-a-dope" tactic during the takeover negotiations. Musk conceded that he "may have." Arnzen alleged that this approach resulted in individual shareholders receiving information from Musk’s public comments that was not intended for transparency but rather for his own strategic benefit. For much of the early questioning on Wednesday, Musk adhered to answering with "yes" or "no" or "I don’t recall." However, as the proceedings extended, Musk admitted he was attempting to avoid straightforward "yes" or "no" answers, accusing Arnzen of "trying to mislead the jury" with his questions. Judge Charles Breyer, overseeing the trial, briefly suspended the proceedings, addressed Musk directly, and then directed that questioning continue.

Musk’s more reserved responses mirrored those of one of his senior employees, Jared Birchall, who testified before the jury on Tuesday. Birchall oversees Musk’s family office and manages his personal financial investments and business dealings. Birchall responded with "I don’t recall" dozens of times to Arnzen’s questions regarding meetings he attended concerning Twitter, conversations with Musk about the acquisition, and emails Birchall authored and dispatched in relation to the deal. Birchall also stated that he did not recall that Jack Dorsey was the chief executive of Twitter prior to Musk’s takeover bid. Dorsey and Musk are known to be friends, and Dorsey had recently departed as the platform’s head just months before Musk’s bid, having led the company for seven years. The current trial, focused on the alleged market manipulation stemming from Musk’s tweets, underscores the significant impact and scrutiny his online pronouncements carry, particularly within the financial markets and the tech industry. Investors are seeking to recover losses they claim were incurred as a direct result of relying on Musk’s public statements during a critical period of the Twitter acquisition process. The legal proceedings are expected to delve further into the intent behind Musk’s communications and their ripple effects on investor confidence and market stability. The outcome of this trial could set a precedent for how influential figures’ social media activity is legally interpreted and its consequences for market participants.