Musk’s lawyers file mistrial citing bias interference
Get the Energy newsletter
Daily energy & climate — solar, EVs, oil, the policy fights and tech bets shaping the transition. Free.
- Musk’s legal team filed a 20‑page motion for mistrial on March 7, citing community animosity toward him during jury selection, where nearly 40 prospective jurors were dismissed for bias.
- The motion lists five grounds: plaintiffs’ counsel violated a pretrial ruling banning securities‑law arguments about Musk’s secret 9% Twitter stock accumulation; the judge barred the defense from rebutting privacy‑law claims while allowing plaintiffs to repeat them; the judge repeatedly interrupted defense counsel during examinations of former CFO Ned Segal and former CEO Parag Agrawal; plaintiffs asked questions that forced attorney‑client privilege objections; and plaintiffs introduced irrelevant material about Musk’s wealth, relocation, and firing of Twitter’s top lawyer.
- The case (Pampena v. Musk) is a class‑action filed in October 2022 on behalf of shareholders who sold Twitter stock between May 13 and Oct 4 2022, alleging Musk’s false tweets about bot accounts drove down the price.
- Musk testified he believed Twitter’s bot numbers were far higher than the company’s estimate and called the 5% estimate “BS”.
- Judge Charles Breyer has not yet ruled on the mistrial motion; the trial is scheduled to continue through March 19.
- Dave Ward (Electrek) observes that filing a mistrial motion signals Musk’s team sees the trial trajectory as unfavorable, though such motions are a standard tactical move that creates a record for appeal.
Why it matters: The motion stalls the case’s progress, meaning shareholders awaiting restitution must wait longer while Musk seeks a fresh jury to neutralize perceived bias, and the judge’s ruling will determine whether the trial proceeds to a verdict or restarts with a new panel.
Ask SkimNews
