Alex Jones found liable over Sandy Hook hoax conspiracy

#430
#430
bamawriter said:
I've been watching and I completely disagree.
Click to expand...

It's a complete political witch hunt. Nothing more. Based on this trial, anyone person could be offended could sue and automatically be awarded damages. Watch this and learn something.

 
#431
#431
RockyTop85 said:
Show of hands: who would be surprised to learn that this guy is a regular infowars viewer?
Click to expand...

Nope, never seen it. These judges have railroaded Jones. Whether you like him or not, these judges have completely stripped him of his defense.
 
#435
#435
happy-go_vol said:
It's a complete political witch hunt. Nothing more. Based on this trial, anyone person could be offended could sue and automatically be awarded damages. Watch this and learn something.

Click to expand...

@bamawriter @Velo Vol

In my view, this post illustrate how Jones’s appeal was damaged, yesterday.

Prior to yesterday, maybe this had legs. Maybe he really didn’t have the documents that were requested (although it wasn’t just documents, he also repeatedly no-showed for his scheduled deposition). Maybe the discovery requests were abusive and overly broad.

Then, throughout the damages trial, he and his attorneys were trying to mitigate the judgment by making him out to be poor and remorseful. (Punitive damages are supposed to stop bad behavior so $100,000 might make a middle class person think twice but Elon Musk may not give a shot about that much, also a truly remorseful person would need less deterrence.)

The phone contents contradict their entire defense. He’s literally on the stand saying “I can get you those records…” that supposedly contradict what they were able to do with discovery that he had tried to deny them. Assuming it was unintentional disclosure, which seems to be the case, based on the hot mic sidebar, their whole defense was to ******** their way through trial and deprive the plaintiff of information that would have shown they were lying. After yesterday, why would an appellate court believe that this wasn’t their plan for the defamation trial?

It seems draconian to impose default judgment, but the argument that it wasn’t justified took a big hit, yesterday.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lawrence Wright and bamawriter
#437
#437
RockyTop85 said:
@bamawriter @Velo Vol

In my view, this post illustrate how Jones’s appeal was damaged, yesterday.

Prior to yesterday, maybe this had legs. Maybe he really didn’t have the documents that were requested (although it wasn’t just documents, he also repeatedly no-showed for his scheduled deposition). Maybe the discovery requests were abusive and overly broad.

Then, throughout the damages trial, he and his attorneys were trying to mitigate the judgment by making him out to be poor and remorseful. (Punitive damages are supposed to stop bad behavior so $100,000 might make a middle class person think twice but Elon Musk may not give a shot about that much, also a truly remorseful person would need less deterrence.)

The phone contents contradict their entire defense. He’s literally on the stand saying “I can get you those records…” that supposedly contradict what they were able to do with discovery that he had tried to deny them. Assuming it was unintentional disclosure, which seems to be the case, based on the hot mic sidebar, their whole defense was to ******** their way through trial and deprive the plaintiff of information that would have shown they were lying. After yesterday, why would an appellate court believe that this wasn’t their plan for the defamation trial?

It seems draconian to impose default judgment, but the argument that it wasn’t justified took a big hit, yesterday.
Click to expand...


And this is the problem with Jones and Trump and Powell and Giuliani, and the lot of them. They say and do outrageous things, in some cases unlawful, and when called to account in the legal system rather than simply address the matter straight up, its a dodge of some kind, undermining the judiciary.

Always some kind of meaningless collateral nonsense that always ends up getting them in more trouble than if they had simply worked within the legal system. It is by no means perfect. But it better than effectively this scatter shot junk they pretend is a defense.
 
#438
#438
lawgator1 said:
And this is the problem with Jones and Trump and Powell and Giuliani, and the lot of them. They say and do outrageous things, in some cases unlawful, and when called to account in the legal system rather than simply address the matter straight up, its a dodge of some kind, undermining the judiciary.

Always some kind of meaningless collateral nonsense that always ends up getting them in more trouble than if they had simply worked within the legal system. It is by no means perfect. But it better than effectively this scatter shot junk they pretend is a defense.
Click to expand...
But they can get their spin-offs like David Freiheit, “Viva Frei,” whose business partner used to represent Jones, to say that the legal consequences for their outrageous behavior are outrageous and raise money off of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#439
#439
RockyTop85 said:
@bamawriter @Velo Vol

In my view, this post illustrate how Jones’s appeal was damaged, yesterday.

Prior to yesterday, maybe this had legs. Maybe he really didn’t have the documents that were requested (although it wasn’t just documents, he also repeatedly no-showed for his scheduled deposition). Maybe the discovery requests were abusive and overly broad.

Then, throughout the damages trial, he and his attorneys were trying to mitigate the judgment by making him out to be poor and remorseful. (Punitive damages are supposed to stop bad behavior so $100,000 might make a middle class person think twice but Elon Musk may not give a shot about that much, also a truly remorseful person would need less deterrence.)

The phone contents contradict their entire defense. He’s literally on the stand saying “I can get you those records…” that supposedly contradict what they were able to do with discovery that he had tried to deny them. Assuming it was unintentional disclosure, which seems to be the case, based on the hot mic sidebar, their whole defense was to ******** their way through trial and deprive the plaintiff of information that would have shown they were lying. After yesterday, why would an appellate court believe that this wasn’t their plan for the defamation trial?

It seems draconian to impose default judgment, but the argument that it wasn’t justified took a big hit, yesterday.
Click to expand...

I agree. And interestingly enough I think he would have had a decent defense had he actually done what he was supposed to do and gone to trial. I'm not saying it would have (or should have) been successful, but he obviously had a First Amendment argument. But he sacrificed the opportunity to present that by refusing to do what the law requires. Even with the contents of the phone being really damaging to his defense, it doesn't completely demolish his defense.

Instead, the contents of that phone set the plaintiff up for a massive award of damages.
 
#442
#442
bamawriter said:
I agree. And interestingly enough I think he would have had a decent defense had he actually done what he was supposed to do and gone to trial. I'm not saying it would have (or should have) been successful, but he obviously had a First Amendment argument. But he sacrificed the opportunity to present that by refusing to do what the law requires. Even with the contents of the phone being really damaging to his defense, it doesn't completely demolish his defense.

Instead, the contents of that phone set the plaintiff up for a massive award of damages.
Click to expand...
Maybe he would have had a defense. I think the differences between this and the recent dismissal of the Sandmann suit are significant. For example, Jones was more persistent, his statements and the statements made on infowars were presented as investigated facts, and some people have demonstrated that they clearly believed it and it lowered their opinion of the plaintiffs.

Regardless, his public defense seems to be to ask people to ignore all of his antecedent conduct that caused this result. It’s not a new tactic, but I can’t understand why people continue to beclown themselves by indulging that argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bamawriter
#446
#446
happy-go_vol said:
Lol, at least ypur honest
Click to expand...

I'm trying to get thru it, but I'm not seeing how it actually bolsters his case. I think the fact that it was produced before Jones' testimony is telling. I wonder if these guys would make the same argument after yesterday's events.
 
#447
#447
bamawriter said:
I'm trying to get thru it, but I'm not seeing how it actually bolsters his case. I think the fact that it was produced before Jones' testimony is telling. I wonder if these guys would make the same argument after yesterday's events.
Click to expand...

The whole process denied jones any type of defense. As I say, it's a kgb type show trial. The judge is as objective as most Chinese "judges" it's a complete joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DonjoVol
#448
#448
happy-go_vol said:
When one get his news from msnbc. This is what is expected.
Click to expand...
The 5 essential facts are no longer in dispute.

1) The Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut by Adam Lanza did take place. Lanza also killed his own mother.

2) Alex Jones told his "InfoWars" audience for years that the shooting was an orchestrated fabrication from liberals, who were trying to use the shooting to impose legislation that would infringe upon 2nd Amendment rights of patriotic Americans.

3) Alex Jones further claimed that the parents of the murdered children were actors, who had been paid by George Soros.

4) Those Sandy Hook parents were subjected to prolonged harassment by people who cited the InfoWars allegations as their justification.

5) Under direct testimony from his lawyer, Alex Jones admitted that his allegations were false. Jones also apologized to those Sandy Hook parents, and admitted that his allegations were irresponsible.

This really shouldn't be a case that involved political partisanship. It involved human decency, and a man who was willing to tell malicious lies in order to promote himself, his show, and his extremist political agenda.



 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128, K-town Vol Fan and DuckInAPen
#449
#449
happy-go_vol said:
The whole process denied jones any type of defense. As I say, it's a kgb type show trial. The judge is as objective as most Chinese "judges" it's a complete joke.
Click to expand...
Has your YouTube guy who works with Jones’s lawyers not told you why he was “denied any type of defense?” Do you think it’s solely because the judge biased and for no other reason?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top