The Tesla “whistleblower” who was accused of sabotage has filed a counterclaim against Tesla and Elon Musk, arguing that his former employer defamed him when it told media outlets that he had threatened a mass shooting. 
 
 Martin Tripp, a former technician at Tesla’s Gigafactory in Nevada, was sued by the electric car company on 20 June, just days after Musk had sent a company email stating that an employee had engaged in “quite extensive and damaging sabotage” against the company’s computer systems. 
 
 The lawsuit accused Tripp of hacking, theft, and making false claims to the media about punctured battery cells and excess scrap material. 
 
 Tripp fought back, telling reporters that he was not a saboteur, but a whistleblower who had leaked information to a reporter for Business Insider out of environmental and safety concerns. 
 
 In response to Tripp’s claim to be a whistleblower, Musk told the Guardian by email on the evening of 20 June that Tesla had “received a call at the Gigafactory that he was going to come back and shoot people”. 
 
 Elon Musk: the volatile visionary at risk of steering Tesla off the road Read more 
 
 The Guardian did not publish the allegation, but other media outlets did, based on an official statement from a company spokesperson stating that the call came “from a friend of Mr Tripp”. The local sheriff’s department announced that “there was no credible threat” the next day. 
 
 Earlier this month, Musk faced significant backlash after he baselessly accused one of the British cave divers involved in the rescue of 12 Thai children of being a “pedo”. The diver said he was considering legal action, and Musk eventually apologized. 
 
 William Fischbach, one of the attorneys representing Tripp, said Tuesday: “Tesla has made several false and defamatory statements about Mr Tripp in an effort to discredit him before the general public.” 
 
 Another attorney for Tripp, Robert D Mitchell, added: “There were very suspicious, very contradictory stories that were advanced by Tesla. We’re going to be interested in getting to the bottom of how the story was concocted.” 
 
 Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It has previously challenged the accuracy of Tripp’s claims. 
 
 
 
 The counterclaim, filed in federal court in Nevada on Tuesday, reasserts claims that Tripp had made to Business Insider about his concerns over “high levels of waste and scrap”, “unnerving, dangerous and wasteful business practices” and “punctured battery modules”. 
 
 The countersuit also alleges that Tesla never received any phone call from “a friend of Mr Tripp” and argues that even if the company had received such a call, it acted “with at least negligence” by failing to “conduct a reasonable investigation” prior to publicizing the information. 
 
 The suit further alleges various problems with Tesla’s behavior on the night of the alleged shooting threat, stating that Tesla had “provided inconsistent responses” to law enforcement when asked whether the caller was male or female; that Tesla “provided false information” to law enforcement when it claimed to be able to “verify” that Tripp was “armed”; and that Tesla “appeared to know exactly where Mr Tripp was located” during the course of the sheriff’s department’s investigation, telling investigators that “little birds sing”. 
 
 
 
 Mitchell and Fischbach declined to comment on the source of their information about Tesla’s statements to investigators, but they said they had confidence in their evidence. 
 
 The suit also addresses a series of tweets that Musk sent about the Business Insider reporter, Linette Lopez, to whom Tripp had leaked information. 
 
 Elon Musk (@elonmusk) Indeed, very simple question. To be specific: @lopezlinette, did you compensate or promise to compensate Martin Tripp for inside information about Tesla? Did he, under that inducement, provide you with exaggerated negative info, which you printed, but turned out to be untrue? 
 
 The countersuit claims that the tweet “falsely implies that Mr Tripp accepted a bribe from Ms Lopez in exchange for providing information”, which Tripp denies. 
 
 Tripp is seeking at least $1m and punitive damages for claims of defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. 
 
 The countersuit comes at a sensitive time for Tesla, which is under intense pressure from investors to prove that it can mass-produce its electric vehicles and turn a profit. 
 
 Tesla will announce its quarterly financial results Wednesday. ||||| Martin Tripp, an ex-Tesla technician the company has accused of hacking and sabotage, has now countersued his former employer and claimed that Tesla defamed him. 
 
 Since Tesla fired Tripp and sued him more than a month ago for alleged trade secrets theft, he has hired a New York attorney to help him file a formal whistleblower complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission. 
 
 CEO Elon Musk has suggested that there could be tens of "bad apples" who have also committed "sabotage" against the company in an apparent effort to thwart Tesla's ambitious promised ramp-up to produce 5,000 Model 3s per week. In recent months the company mounted an unusual tent-like apparatus known as a Sprung structure that houses a new assembly line as part of its factory in Fremont, California. 
 
 However, to date, Tesla has not brought any cases against any further alleged saboteurs. 
 
 In a new lawsuit filed Tuesday by his new Arizona-based legal team, Tripp more fully explained his concerns. 
 
 A long, dusty road 
 
 Tripp previously worked at the Gigafactory in Sparks, Nevada, which manufactures Tesla’s batteries. 
 
 There, he "observed that the waste and scrap levels and non-conforming materials generated by Counterdefendant dramatically increased" after the March 2018 so-called "March to 2,500." The "March to 2,500" referred to Tesla's goal of ramping up to 2,500 Model 3s and then 5,000 by July 2018. 
 
 The lawsuit goes on to explain that Tripp "raised his concerns about the seemingly exorbitant amounts of scrap with his managers and supervisors but no action was taken." On May 16, 2018, he went so far as to email Musk himself and included supporting "graphical charts," in anticipation of Musk’s visit to the Gigafactory. 
 
 As the civil complaint continues: 
 
 Later in the afternoon on May 16, 2018, Mr. Tripp's Manufacturing Engineer Manager asked Mr. Tripp to "forward" him the "email to Elon so that I can avoid getting fired tonight." After Mr. Tripp asked why the Manufacturing Engineer Manager would get fired, the Manufacturing Engineer Manager explained: "because I'm the guy showing him the line and our problems like yield, the guy standing in front of him is the guy who gets fired, and tonight I’m the guy in front of him." That same day, a Design Engineer asked Mr. Tripp to "clean up" the stator production line area so Mr. Musk would not see the mounds of scrap and waste lying on the ground. Mr. Tripp declined to do so because he had repeatedly complained to his supervisors about that very issue over the course of several months, but his complaints had been ignored. Mr. Tripp wanted Mr. Musk to observe how the Gigafactory was actually being operated. The next day, May 17, 2018, Mr. Tripp was "reassigned" to the battery module production line. … Perhaps most egregiously, Mr. Tripp was told by multiple process technicians and associates that a "teach pin" had been left on a robot used in the manufacturing process of battery modules, causing damage to the battery modules. Mr. Tripp was told by the process technicians and associates that when the robot had picked up a battery module, the teach pin, which had become "unthreaded" and "longer," struck the clamshell (i.e., the outer plastic coating) of the battery module, causing a dent and/or puncture. Mr. Tripp was further told that, eventually, the teach pin began puncturing the actual battery cells within the battery module. Approximately 1,173 battery modules had been damaged by this process. 
 
 For its part, Tesla has strongly denied that any such damaged batteries made it into any Model 3. The company has previously said in a statement that "Tripp is either not telling the truth or he simply has no idea what he is talking about." 
 
 Bye, bye, birdie? 
 
 In yet another bizarre turn in this twisted tale, in the immediate wake of the June 2018 lawsuit filed against Tripp, a woman at the Gigafactory said she received a call from an anonymous caller claiming that Tripp had threatened to "shoot the place up." 
 
 Tripp previously categorically denied making any such statement to Ars, which prompted a visit by the Storey County Sheriff. The local authorities ultimately determined that there was "no credible threat." 
 
 Even if Tesla did receive such a call, according to the lawsuit, Tesla "did not, based upon information and belief, conduct a reasonable investigation to determine whether the purported caller was actually a 'friend of Mr. Tripp' before making the foregoing false and defamatory publication, such as obtaining the name of the caller or ascertaining how the caller knew Mr. Tripp." 
 
 This, Tripp’s lawyers argue, constitutes "at least negligence." 
 
 Even more strangely, the lawsuit continues, during the sheriff's investigation, Tesla "appeared to know exactly where Mr. Tripp was located the majority of the time and, after being asked by the investigating deputies how it was aware of such information, [Tesla] simply replied ‘little birds sing.’" 
 
 Tesla did not immediately respond to Ars' request for comment. ||||| Photo: Getty 
 
 Martin Tripp is currently embroiled in a nasty legal dispute over claims he’s made about his former employer, Tesla. On Wednesday evening, Tripp began tweeting out details and photos about his time at Tesla and found himself suspended faster than you can say, “Infowars was an inside job.” 
 
 A former technician for the electric vehicle company, Tripp was fired by Tesla earlier this year and he was accused by Elon Musk of being a “saboteur.” A subsequent lawsuit filed by the company accused Tripp of hacking into “the company’s confidential and trade secret information and transferred that information to third parties,” and giving false information to media outlets. Tripp took his claims to the SEC and filed a whistleblower tip. He then filed a $1 million defamation lawsuit against Tesla. There’s a lot of bad blood between these two parties. 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 Earlier tonight, Tripp took to his personal Twitter and began posting photos that he claims help back up some of the assertions that Tesla has denied. “Are you ready,” he asked his followers and proceeded to upload photos of what he claimed to be improperly handled cooling tubes, proof of damaged battery cells being reworked and installed in cars that were sold, and graphics about a high volume of scrap waste. Tripp made many other allegations but what might be his most jaw-dropping disclosure was a listing of Teslas that he claims were sold with “punctured / dented / damaged” batteries. 
 
 
 
 If you’re a Tesla owner, you might want to make your way here, here, here, and here to check out the VIN numbers of models that are allegedly carrying hazardous batteries. 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 But not all of Tripp’s tweets are still on his page. He told Gizmodo that he’s been slapped with a twelve-hour suspension by Twitter and some tweets were deleted. In a direct message (he can still use DMs) he told us that he believes it was because at least one photo contained “an email [address] with Elon’s name.” We can confirm that one photo did appear to show what may be Elon Musk’s email address. Tripp showed us a screenshot of the notification Twitter sent him, and it does list the reason for his temporary suspension as violating its policies against posting private information: “You may not publish or post other people’s private information without their express authorization and permission.” 
 
 Here’s the image that contained Musk’s name beside an email address with the address redacted: 
 
 Screenshot: Martin Tripp 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 Whatever the veracity of Tripp’s claims, you have to give him credit for just laying his case out there for all to see. We contacted Tesla for comment and a spokesperson told us: 
 
 As we’ve said before, these claims are false and Mr. Tripp does not even have personal knowledge about the safety claims that he is making. No punctured cells have ever been used in any Model 3 vehicles in any way, and all VINs that have been identified have safe batteries. Notably, there have been zero battery safety issues in any Model 3. 
 
 Tripp also finds himself as an example of how quickly Twitter is capable of responding to a violation of its policies while the social networks CEO is doing publicity 24/7 to explain how hard it was to suspend Alex Jones, the conspiracy theorist host of Infowars who is being sued for claiming the Sandy Hook school shooting was a hoax and inspiring his followers to harass and dox the victims’ families. When asked for comment on this story, Twitter did not immediately reply. 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 It definitely appears that Tripp violated Twitter’s terms, and the fact that the company responded in a matter of a couple of hours sets a new gold standard for which we should all hold the company accountable. We’re more than curious to find out if its capable of evaluating violations so quickly when the personal information belongs to someone who’s not a billionaire. 
 
 [ht Lora Kolodny/CNBC]
– The technician accused of stealing data from Tesla's battery factory in Nevada is countersuing his former employer and CEO Elon Musk for defamation. "Tesla has made several false and defamatory statements about [Martin] Tripp in an effort to discredit him," a lawyer says. The Guardian specifically mentions Musk claiming on June 20 that Tesla "received a call at the Gigafactory that he was going to come back and shoot people." Per CNBC, a Tesla rep added "a friend of Mr. Tripp" claimed he would "shoot the place up." Tripp—who's painted himself as a whistleblower concerned by Tesla's "dangerous" practices, including alleged use of punctured battery cells repaired with glue, per Business Insider—described the claim as "insane." A day later, the local sheriff's department announced "there was no credible threat." That's because there was no phone call, and if there had been, Tesla acted with "at least negligence" in publicizing the information before investigating, reads Tripp's lawsuit, filed Tuesday in Nevada, per Ars Technica. It further notes Tesla seemed to know Tripp's location during the law enforcement investigation and "provided false information" to authorities when claiming it could "verify" the 40-year-old was "armed." "We're … interested in getting to the bottom of how the story was concocted," a lawyer for Tripp tells the Guardian. Tripp, who denies Tesla's claim that he wrote software used to lift data from factory computers (he says he can't even code), is seeking at least $1 million plus punitive damages for alleged defamation, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. His lawsuit notes he's received "numerous threats" to his safety.