Twitter Down: Jury Deliberates on Musk ‘On Hold’ Tweet and Investor Fraud Claims
twitter down became a flashpoint in a San Francisco courtroom Tuesday afternoon (ET) as an eight-person jury began deliberating whether Elon Musk misled Twitter Inc. investors with posts during his 2022 takeover bid. The case centers on Musk’s May 13, 2022, tweet saying his $44 billion agreement to buy the platform was “temporarily on hold, ” a statement investors say helped send the stock tumbling. Jurors must now decide liability and, if necessary, the size of any damages tied to the stock’s alleged artificial deflation.
What the jury is deciding in San Francisco (ET)
Deliberations began Tuesday afternoon (ET) after closing arguments in a civil trial focused on whether Musk made material false statements during the acquisition process. The verdict form asks jurors to evaluate Musk’s May 13 tweet, a later May 16 tweet, and statements made during an interview with the “All-In” business and tech podcast.
If jurors find Musk liable, they are also tasked with determining how much Twitter’s stock was “artificially deflated” for each day in a defined period running from May 13 to Oct. 3, 2022, when Musk agreed to buy the company at the original $54. 20 per share agreement. The exact dollar figure, if any, may not be known immediately because additional data would be needed to calculate a total damages award.
Closing arguments: Investors allege deliberate stock pressure
Plaintiffs—shareholders bringing the claims—argued that Musk’s public posts and statements formed part of a deliberate plan to drive down Twitter’s stock price so he could renegotiate at a better price. Their argument leaned heavily on what they say was a pattern of messaging about spam and fake accounts, often referred to as bots, and the impact that messaging had on market value.
Mark Molumphy, attorney at Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy LLP, told jurors that Musk’s posts were intentional. “Mr. Musk’s tweets were not some innocent mistakes, some stupid tweet that he didn’t consider, ” Molumphy said during closing arguments Tuesday (ET). Molumphy also told the jury, “Mr. Musk literally had no proof for these tweets that he issued. ”
In the middle of the trial fight, twitter down is not about an outage—it is about whether a handful of statements from a high-profile buyer unlawfully moved a public company’s stock.
Defense: No fraud, and concerns about spam were genuine
Musk testified that he believed Twitter executives, including chief executive officer Parag Agrawal and financial officer Ned Segal, lied to him and in public financial statements about the percentage of spam and fake accounts. He told jurors the May 13 tweet was not his “wisest, ” but maintained he was always committed to the deal and had genuine concerns about resolving Twitter’s spam issue.
Musk’s attorney Michael Lifrak of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP urged jurors to reject the securities-fraud claim. “Two tweets and a podcast does not equal securities fraud, ” Lifrak said during closing arguments Tuesday (ET). Lifrak also told jurors that talk of renegotiation was out in the open once bot concerns surfaced: “Of course people were talking about a renegotiation once this bot issue came up. There was no secret about that. ”
Quick context on how this trial reached the jury
Jurors heard three weeks of live testimony from Musk and top Twitter executives, revisiting what witnesses described as a turbulent six-month period in 2022 when Musk repeatedly shifted his position on whether he would buy the company. That period included litigation with Twitter’s board of directors aimed at forcing Musk to follow through on the purchase.
Separately, the case also aired disputes over bot estimates: Musk asserted Twitter had far more fake and spam accounts than the 5 percent figure disclosed in regulatory filings, while former CFO Ned Segal disputed that and testified the number was closer to 1 percent.
What’s next as the verdict timeline remains unclear
The jury will continue deliberations with no set timetable for a decision, and a verdict is expected only after deliberations conclude. If jurors find liability, the next phase is quantifying damages—an outcome that could take additional work beyond the initial decision.
Until the jury speaks, the courtroom battle over twitter down remains focused on one core question: whether Musk’s 2022 public statements were materially false in a way that unlawfully harmed investors.
