Alex Jones court case

Related:
Create New Tag

8/7/2022 9:49 AM

Well, since we are allowed to talk about politics...Is Alex Jones basically on trial for a thoughtcrime like George Orwell talked about in 1984? I haven't followed the trial entirely because I don't have cable, and I have more important things to tend to. But this whole thing seems nuts, a $40 million pay out for having the wrong opinion?

And the part about his defense attorney sending his two years of text messages to the prosecutor is insane too. Seems like that would call for a mistrial, but I am not the expert on this type of thing.

The below article had a lot of good info.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/08/04/alex-jones-trial-judge-denies-request-for-mistrial-after-his-attorney-mistakenly-sends-texts-to-opposing-counsel/

|

8/7/2022 9:55 AM
Edited Date/Time: 8/7/2022 9:57 AM

Defaming a group of people who lost their small children to violent and horrific homicide for ratings and to make sales is not a "thought crime". This guy intentionally spat on these families and later claimed it was for the entertainment value. It's time people are held accountable for the insane steps they'll take to get famous and spread over the top misinformation.

|

8/7/2022 10:02 AM

What do you mean by "for having the wrong opinion"?

|

8/7/2022 10:17 AM

kongols wrote:

What do you mean by "for having the wrong opinion"?

It seemed to me like he was on trial for thinking that Sandy Hook was a hoax, just like there are still people who think that the earth is flat, or that we didn't land on the moon.

|

8/7/2022 10:27 AM

Despite that thing called 'free speech', there are implications when speech causes harm.

|

HAF

8/7/2022 10:40 AM
Edited Date/Time: 8/7/2022 10:45 AM

Shawn142 wrote:

Defaming a group of people who lost their small children to violent and horrific homicide for ratings and to make sales is not ...more

Hmmm, so all that money for profiting off of lies. Maybe they will go after the ruling class next. Doubt it though.

I'm really surprised that he couldn't have just said that his opinion changed after he did further research, or he just learned more about the case.

|

8/7/2022 10:45 AM

Was he personally sued this time?
Or was his Free Speech Systems LLC (Infowars parent co.) company sued?
Or even PQPR Holdings?
I'm sure there will be all kinds of bankruptcy stuff filed with the companies he owns.
I highly doubt he'll ever pay anywhere near the full amount.

|

8/7/2022 11:05 AM
Edited Date/Time: 8/7/2022 11:06 AM

ns503 wrote:

Despite that thing called 'free speech', there are implications when speech causes harm.

Yep.
I'm in the thinking that his speech is protected under 1st A in regards to criminal charges against him in this matter but not civil due to his intent. He was the only news outlet with a global/national audience making the crazy claims over & over again. If other global/national media outlets had made the same claims as him it would've been much harder to prove intent. All he would've had to say is others reported it so I thought it was real and I reported it.
However,he knew dam well it wasn't real.

|

8/7/2022 11:50 AM

kongols wrote:

What do you mean by "for having the wrong opinion"?

vanillaice782 wrote:

It seemed to me like he was on trial for thinking that Sandy Hook was a hoax, just like there are still people who think that ...more

He effectively made the claims that the parents who lost their children were paid actors and were lying to everyone about it over and over again. He wasn’t saying that this ‘may’ have been the case, he repeatedly represented it as fact, claimed that he had evidence (that didn’t exist), and it was shown that he continued doing this after he knew that he was lying.

So no, he wasn’t being sued for a ‘thought crime’. He was sued for his actions of willfully lying, impugning, and taunting the parents who lost their children.

|



8/7/2022 12:46 PM

Criminal Libel isn’t really a thing anymore. Though it once was. But generally his speech is protected under 1A, but that’s only from government persecution. He’s protected there.

But Civil Libel he has no freedom of speech that is libelous or slanderous. He is not protected from prosecution.

What is libelous speech?
Libel is a method of defamation expressed by print, writing, pictures, signs, effigies, or any communication embodied in physical form that is injurious to a person's reputation, exposes a person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, or injures a person in his/her business or profession.

He is absolutely guilty of civil libel. His speech was injurious to the parents. It was injurious to their reputation. It was 100% defamation of the dead children to spread lies.

Criminally he’s protected, but civilly he has zero protection and he rightly was sued into oblivion.

This isn’t just a matter of a difference of opinion. He willfully spread hateful and harmful lies that caused emotional injury to others.

Open and shut case.

Fuck Alex Jones. He’s poison. I’m glad he lost. And he deserved it.

|

8/7/2022 12:46 PM

The video of Robbie Parker is a bit suspect.

|

8/7/2022 1:35 PM

TXDirt wrote:

Criminal Libel isn’t really a thing anymore. Though it once was. But generally his speech is protected under 1A, but that’s ...more

X2 .

Especially the last line .

|

8/7/2022 2:18 PM

I doubt 1984 would be the cultural gem that it is if the plot was Winston Smith relentlessly spouting conspiracy theories while foaming at the mouth like a rabid, braindead ape and then ended up being sued by private citizens for his own stupid actions.

|

8/7/2022 5:06 PM

vanillaice782 wrote:

Hmmm, so all that money for profiting off of lies. Maybe they will go after the ruling class next. Doubt it though.

I'm ...more

He did say he changed his mind but only after he was under oath and couldn't risk perjury charges for lying about it any longer. Meanwhile he hides his ill gotten gains in shell corporations and then declares bankruptcy so he won't have to pay. Hell of a guy.

|

8/7/2022 5:27 PM
Edited Date/Time: 8/7/2022 7:52 PM

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence.

He didn’t have “opinions”, he was spewing bullshit and calling parents of slain children actors and liars. Not just that, he was exploiting the tragedy for his own profit. The dude probably never believed his own garbage.

Imagine grieving the loss of a murdered child and having your image plastered over the internet calling you a liar, and part of a conspiracy

The fuckwit deserves it. What a shit human.

|

8/7/2022 5:41 PM

BMSOBx2 wrote:

He did say he changed his mind but only after he was under oath and couldn't risk perjury charges for lying about it any ...more

I figured that would be his strategy all along. It's a great way to protect your assets, but it can be used for evil too.

|

8/7/2022 8:48 PM
Edited Date/Time: 8/7/2022 8:56 PM

vanillaice782 wrote:

Well, since we are allowed to talk about politics...Is Alex Jones basically on trial for a thoughtcrime like George Orwell ...more

Nope you're certainly no expert.

On the texts, they weren't sent to the 'prosecutor' as this was a civil case. Also Jones specifically said under oath that there were no texts before his dumbshit dollar store lawyer sent them to the plaintiffs' attorney.

In fact he lost the main case by default for not complying with disclosure. Dishonesty has consequences and he only has himself to blame.





|

8/8/2022 12:53 AM

Alex Jones is what you call “controlled opposition”. Basically a propagandist cartoon character. Someone who was put in his position on purpose to make average people lump all “conspiracy theorists” together with people like him. This is so that even if someone is putting out some compelling evidence against the mainstream narrative, they will be immediately dismissed as an “Alex Jones type” or “tin foil hat” wearer.

But make no mistake about it, the more you look into that Sandy Hook thing, and Adam Lanza, the more disturbing it gets. The public will never know exactly what happened that day, and if you’re trusting what “mainstream news” sources are telling you about what happened, then there’s no hope for you on this and you probably don’t really care about the truth, regardless. This is coming from someone who lives one town over from there.

|

8/8/2022 3:42 AM

What was his actual crime? I get that he said some incredibly ignorant things, but doesn't there have to be some sort of damages proven in a civil case?

|

8/8/2022 4:03 AM

No 'crime' as such. Damages don't have to have been for financial loss, they can be awarded for all sorts of harm caused. Plus the court awarded punitive damages that acts as a deterrent.

One thing that I do find strange about the US civil court system is having juries. Not only do they decide cases but get to set the amount of damages awarded. Defamation is a complicated and nuanced area of law and shouldn't really be decided by the totally inexperienced in my view.

|

8/8/2022 5:32 AM

Elliot wrote:

No 'crime' as such. Damages don't have to have been for financial loss, they can be awarded for all sorts of harm caused. Plus ...more

I agree, I am a lawyer myself, and used to work in a firm practicing criminal law. Currently I do corporate law, but having experience from both fields I´m confident in saying a jury has no place in a civil court IMO.
What is quite common is to have assistant judges nominated by the parties involved where expertice is required to fully understand the case. Say CERN had an issue with a technical matter from a supplier, a judge would need technical and scientifical assistance to strengthen the court. That is also why arbitration is so popular betweeen professional parties.

|

8/8/2022 5:57 AM

laughing

Photo
|

8/8/2022 6:49 AM

creature654 wrote:

Alex Jones is what you call “controlled opposition”. Basically a propagandist cartoon character. Someone who was put in his ...more

Are you saying Alex Jones is part of a conspiracy to discredit conspiracy theories?

|

8/8/2022 7:57 AM

creature654 wrote:

Alex Jones is what you call “controlled opposition”. Basically a propagandist cartoon character. Someone who was put in his ...more

lappedrider wrote:

Are you saying Alex Jones is part of a conspiracy to discredit conspiracy theories?

😂😂😂

|

8/8/2022 11:06 AM
Edited Date/Time: 8/8/2022 11:06 AM

freeh wrote:

What was his actual crime? I get that he said some incredibly ignorant things, but doesn't there have to be some sort of ...more

No crime it was a civil case regarding "Punitive damages".

Punitive damages are damages assessed in order to punish the defendant for outrageous conduct and/or to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit

From Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages

|

8/8/2022 1:00 PM

I honestly can't believe what this piece of human excrement has said is even considered being covered by "freedom of speech". Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, calling in bomb threats, saying that there are aliens eating babies in the back room of a pizza joint. That is NOT freedom of speech.

Each American has the right to say that they BELIEVE whatever...no matter how non-sensical. But when you have a public forum and spout falsehoods and claim them as fact...that is over the line.

It's a good thing I'm not a judge. My penalties for trying to destroy the fabric of the nation would be.... medievalblush

|

If it ain't yer's don't take it, If it ain't the truth dont say it, If it ain't right don't do it...Marcus Aurelius

8/8/2022 1:30 PM

creature654 wrote:

Alex Jones is what you call “controlled opposition”. Basically a propagandist cartoon character. Someone who was put in his ...more

lappedrider wrote:

Are you saying Alex Jones is part of a conspiracy to discredit conspiracy theories?

Photo
|

8/8/2022 2:23 PM
Edited Date/Time: 8/8/2022 5:19 PM

Grifters gotta grift bros. It amazes me that people fall for these buffoons rhetoric.

|

8/9/2022 12:08 AM

Jones never had a chance after looking up the judge's social media. I'm sure she never let her bias play a role during the trial.



Photo

|

8/9/2022 2:11 AM
Edited Date/Time: 8/9/2022 3:39 AM

Monster=Brawndo wrote:

Jones never had a chance after looking up the judge's social media. I'm sure she never let her bias play a role during the ...more

This isn’t a left vs right issue
The dude called the parents of murdered children, actors and liars.
Turns out there a ramifications for spewing bullshit about people to a large audience.

It’s sad that every issue gets turned into a left vs right issue. Stop contributing to this crap.

|