Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Journalists Trespass, Assault Tesla employees at the Gigafactory

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So the thing is that even by Tesla's report, the journalists "climbed through a fence". This means that by the time they were back at their vehicle (where the altercation took place), they were no longer on Tesla property. At that point, did Tesla employees have any legal right to attempt to detain the journalists? If someone trespasses into your home, you have every right to attack and/or detain them, but if they walk in then leave and they're back on public property, if you touch them you're guilty of assault. It's no longer self defense.

Once the journalists were back at their vehicle, they were assumedly back on public property. Unless they took something of Tesla's with them (and I don't know that pictures count), Tesla had no right to detain them, only the right to take explicit notes or pictures and file a police report. If the Tesla employees were attempting to use their bodies to block the vehicle, I don't know that the journalists were completely at fault for hitting them.

Yeah, we don't know that. You may be right - but it's more likely (imo) that Tesla, like most properties, didn't fence the borders of the property but rather took a more economical route and fenced the area where they wanted †o protect privacy. I'm going to guess they were still on Tesla property.

- - - Updated - - -

Well you should if you're going to characterize them based on their actions. The way they're characterized right now (from the blog post), they're violent and uncaring individuals. However, in a different scenario, they could be extremely nosey reporters who got busted sneaking into somewhere and then felt physically threatened.

Also "once they broke the law"... There are various degrees to that. Trespassing != assault != murder. Someone breaking the law doesn't then mean they're instantly fair game for whatever retaliation.
'

All true points. But I think it's reasonable to believe if the security guards had been physically threatening the reporters, they would have been arrested also.

All speculation - but the facts should come out in court.
 
Well you should if you're going to characterize them based on their actions. The way they're characterized right now (from the blog post), they're violent and uncaring individuals. However, in a different scenario, they could be extremely nosey reporters who got busted sneaking into somewhere and then felt physically threatened.

Also "once they broke the law"... There are various degrees to that. Trespassing != assault != murder. Someone breaking the law doesn't then mean they're instantly fair game for whatever retaliation.

What else would I characterize them based on? They trespassed and then they hit not one, but two guards. Or are you going to argue that the guys in the 5000 lbs Jeep felt threatened by two guards armed with a rock and a knife?
 
What I find most curious is that it was added as a blog post rather than just handled privately.
I do not see anything odd about Tesla publicly posting their version of the events. That's just good PR, getting their version of the incident out.
Even the RGJ story stated that the sheriff, after conducting "an investigation" arrested the RGJ employee, and stated that the Twsla security guard attempted to detain the person for trespassing. Doesn't specify what the charge is.
Someone went too far in attempting to photograph the Gigafactory while being on Tesla's property.
Drone pilots should be aware that they could be violating the law by flying over Tesla's property and photographing. This has been discussed elsewhere on TMC and opinions seem to be divided about the legality of doing that.
 
Tesla blog: journalists hit security folks with their car

Sounds pretty serious... Curious to see what the newspaper says.

Journalists Trespass, Assault Tesla employees at the Gigafactory | Tesla Motors

Last Friday at approximately 11:50 am, a Tesla safety manager received a complaint about two trespassers taking pictures at the Gigafactory. The Tesla employee requested assistance and the Storey County Sheriff’s department was alerted.

After locating the two trespassers, the Tesla employee approached them. He asked their names and notified them that they were trespassing on Tesla property. They refused to provide their names, despite the Reno Gazette Journal (“RGJ”) ID credentials hanging from their pockets. They also denied that they were trespassing even though they had climbed through a fence designated with "private property" signs.

The vehicle belonging to the two trespassers was a Jeep marked with RGJ decals on both doors. The two individuals were later identified as RGJ employees.

The two RGJ employees and the Tesla employee were then met at the Jeep by a second safety manager at the Gigafactory. The two Gigafactory safety managers asked the RGJ employees to wait before departing, as security management and the Sheriff’s Department were en route to the scene. Disregarding this request, the RGJ employees entered the Jeep. As the Tesla employee attempted to record the license plate number on the rear bumper, the driver put it in reverse and accelerated into the Tesla employee, knocking him over, causing him to sustain a blow to the left hip, an approximate 2” bleeding laceration to his right forearm, a 3” bleeding laceration to his upper arm, and scrapes on both palms.

As the RGJ employees fled the scene, their Jeep struck the ATV that carried the two safety managers. When one of the safety managers dismounted the ATV and approached the Jeep, the driver of the Jeep accelerated into him, striking him in the waist.

Once the Sheriff’s Department arrived on the scene, they arrested one of the RGJ employees for two counts of felony assault with a deadly weapon and advised that both will be charged with trespassing.

We appreciate the interest in the Gigafactory, but the repeated acts of trespassing, including by those working for the RGJ, is illegal, dangerous and needs to stop. In particular, we will not stand for assaults on our employees and are working with law enforcement to investigate this incident and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.
 
Last edited:
When security tried to detain them, were they on Tesla property or had they left already?

It sounds like they climbed a fence to get in, so if the scuffle was involved with their vehicle, then maybe it happened outside of the fence after they already left?

It seems to me like it would be a factor if the whole thing happened on Tesla property or not.
 
When security tried to detain them, were they on Tesla property or had they left already?

It sounds like they climbed a fence to get in, so if the scuffle was involved with their vehicle, then maybe it happened outside of the fence after they already left?

It seems to me like it would be a factor if the whole thing happened on Tesla property or not.

As I noted up thread, most companies don't put the fencing way out on the perimeter of the property, but closer in - cost issues. We don't know if the fence was right at the border of the property or not.
 
So the thing is that even by Tesla's report, the journalists "climbed through a fence". This means that by the time they were back at their vehicle (where the altercation took place), they were no longer on Tesla property.

This is not a given. The fence surrounding my property is not exactly on my property line and my yard is considerably smaller than the gigafactory property. It's very possible that the fence is inset a sufficient distance that the trespassers were still on Tesla's property upon returning to their vehicle.
 
Reno Gazette (the employer) did report the story, but zero mention of the fact they snuck onto private property, that the vehicle accelerated into people - and they just say the 'driver of the vehicle was arrested'. Of course they know who the driver is, because he works for them.

RGJ photographer arrested after altercation with security guards near Tesla gigafactory

I just read the linked article and it identifies the driver as Andy Barron, photographer for RGJ since 1998.

Tesla's blog did not mention this: "[FONT=arial, sans-serif]The newspaper’s vehicle was damaged in the altercation. A rock had been used to shatter the driver’s-side window and the driver’s-side seat belt had been cut in half." The sherif could not confirm how that damage had occurred. [/FONT]
 
As I noted up thread, most companies don't put the fencing way out on the perimeter of the property, but closer in - cost issues. We don't know if the fence was right at the border of the property or not.

You make a great point and it seems even after they started building the Gigafactory, Tesla has expanded their land holdings. I bet they were still on Tesla property.

http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-is-buying-up-huge-chunks-of-nevada-2015-7

It was a bad idea for the driver to try and run over Tesla security personnel.
 
Tesla's account is certainly omitting a lot of context. It defies plausibility that it took place like Tesla wrote without any other context. That's not to say the journalists were in the right.... but I also don't think they are likely cold-hearted people that ran over security guards for the fun of it.
 
I see that Andrew Barron has been charged WITH battery.

His defense should be:

"I was at the Gigafactory. I was trying to charge A battery."

lol. At any rate, it sounds like maybe a case of "Well THAT escalated quickly". The property line / fence line not being the same line could have definitely played into it and put the whole incident into some grey areas. Probably some mistakes or poor choices on both sides, though I suspect the journalists may be at greater fault.
 
Yeah, we don't know that. You may be right - but it's more likely (imo) that Tesla, like most properties, didn't fence the borders of the property but rather took a more economical route and fenced the area where they wanted †o protect privacy. I'm going to guess they were still on Tesla property.

This is not a given. The fence surrounding my property is not exactly on my property line and my yard is considerably smaller than the gigafactory property. It's very possible that the fence is inset a sufficient distance that the trespassers were still on Tesla's property upon returning to their vehicle.

So that brings up another grey area. The Tesla blog said, "They also denied that they were trespassing even though they had climbed through a fence designated with "private property" signs." With this signage, the fence is assumed to mark the "Private Property" line. Is it then safe for the journalists to assume that once they were back through that fence they were no longer on private property? Whether they were or not, if it's not marked makes a difference.

If they felt threatened and reasonably assumed they were on public property yet they were still being accosted by Tesla security, they may have felt the Tesla personnel had no right to detain them. And if one of them had a knife (cut the seat belt) or threw a rock through the window, they may have felt they were in physical danger and were going to leave regardless.

Way too much we don't know yet...
 
I bet these guys were fishing for something that they can spin up into a negative story, and sell pictures to other outlets that will pay them handsome for another round of FUD BS.

I can't think of any other motivation other than that to jump over a fence.