"Millionaire Who Allegedly Beat His Girlfriend 117 Times Complains That He Received A $500 Fine"
CREDIT: Promotional image via Palgrave Macmillan
Gurbaksh Chahal is a very wealthy man. He’s made millions of dollars via online advertising startups, and he currently leads the $100 million-a-year company RadiumOne. He also allegedly beat his girlfriend for 30 minutes straight, striking or kicking her 117 times. At least four times during this extended beating, Chahal told his girlfriend that “I’m going to kill you.”
Prosecutors believed that they had an airtight case against Chahal — since the tech millionaire’s home security system reportedly videotaped the entire attack. They also had the testimony of the alleged victim. That is, of course, until she stopped cooperating with the investigation and refused to testify against Chahal. Not long thereafter, a trial judge ruled that the video could not be admitted as evidence against Chahal because police seized it without first obtaining a warrant (prosecutors unsuccessfully argued that police could not wait to obtain a warrant because they feared Chahal would erase the footage). Without crucial evidence implicating Chahal, prosecutors dropped all 45 felony counts against him and he eventually plead guilty to two misdemeanors.
Then he went on Twitter to complain about this outcome.
Though Chahal appears to have deleted his tweets complaining about these events, they include statements such as “I maintain my innocence regarding these exaggerated allegations” and they label the proceedings against him a “witch hunt.” They also include this gem:
CREDIT: Twitter via Business Insider
It takes Chahal’s company slightly more than two and a half minutes to earn $500.
When another Twitter user said to Chahal that “there is a video of you beating your girlfriend,” Chahal denied it, claiming that “[if] there is one it would be out.” He is correct that the video has not been made public — at least not yet — but it would have been a very odd litigation strategy for Chahal’s attorneys to ask the court to suppress the video if it was not, in fact, incriminating.