The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →In February 2026, a federal judge in San Francisco reportedly struggled to seat jurors for a civil case over Elon Musk’s statements during his 2022 Twitter acquisition. The trial later produced a split verdict: a jury found Musk liable for misleading investors through two tweets, but rejected the claim that he intentionally schemed to defraud them. A July ruling left the verdict standing at that stage; the cited report did not state a final damages amount.
What happened during jury selection?
Futurism, reporting details attributed to Courthouse News, said Judge Charles R. Breyer questioned 93 prospective jurors. More than a third said they could not be impartial and were dismissed. The report said nine jurors were ultimately seated, with no alternates. These figures are from secondary reporting; the underlying voir dire transcript was not independently verified.
The case was a civil investor class action in federal court in San Francisco, not a criminal trial. Twitter investors alleged that Musk’s statements during the 2022 acquisition misled them.
Did the court dismiss people just because they disliked Musk?
The reported account does not say that dislike alone disqualified prospective jurors. It distinguishes people who said they could not be impartial from others who expressed strong negative opinions but said they could still decide the case fairly. The relevant question was whether a person could set aside views about Musk, Twitter, or Tesla and follow the evidence and the judge’s instructions.
#1 Best Overall
Futurism reported Breyer asking prospective jurors: “Whatever your opinion is on Mr. Musk, Twitter or Tesla, can you set it aside in the sense that you will judge the defendant based solely, emphasize solely, on the evidence produced in this trial and the law as I give it to you?” The quotation is reproduced from the secondary account, not checked against a transcript.
The headline phrase “people hate him so much” is therefore a colorful characterization, not a finding about public opinion. The voir dire account concerns one jury pool; it does not establish what Americans, San Franciscans, or investors generally think of Musk.
Rank #2
What did the jury decide?
The nine-person jury returned its verdict on March 20, 2026. The federal court’s April 3 judgment records liability under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5(b). The Associated Press reported that jurors found Musk liable for misleading investors through two tweets, but rejected the claim that he intentionally schemed to defraud investors. They also did not find his podcast statement fraudulent.
Those findings are not the same as a finding that every challenged statement was fraudulent or that Musk was found liable on every theory presented. The verdict was split: liability for misleading investors through two tweets, but no finding of an intentional scheme to defraud.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
What happened after the verdict?
Reuters reported on July 6, 2026, that Judge Breyer rejected Musk’s bid to void the verdict, denied his motion to decertify the investor class, and granted prejudgment interest. Reuters also reported an investor-side lawyer’s estimate that damages could reach $2.6 billion. That was an estimate, not a final damages figure; the cited report did not state a final award.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
