🐱 Alex Jones Just Lost 2 Sandy Hook Cases

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
CatParty
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alex-jones-lost-two-sandy-hook-cases_n_61561020e4b008640eb1d56a


Infowars host Alex Jones has lost two of several lawsuits filed against him by relatives of Sandy Hook victims after he routinely failed to comply with requests to produce documents related to his involvement in spreading lies about the deadly shooting.

Judge Maya Guerra Gamble on Monday issued her ruling for default judgments against Jones in two different cases, which means he and the conspiracy-theory-spewing outlet Infowars have been found liable for all damages and a jury will now be convened to determine how much he will owe the plaintiffs. The new rulings became public Thursday.

In the filings, Gamble eviscerated Jones and reasoned that default judgments should be ordered because “an escalating series of judicial admonishments, monetary penalties, and non-dispositive sanctions have all been ineffective at deterring the abuse,” caused by Jones’ unwillingness to turn over documents related to the cases, the Texas judge ruled.

The ruling — which is often referred to in Texas as a “death penalty sanction” for a party unwilling to comply with court orders — is a rarity in the legal world. Jones, who is now on his seventh lawyer in these cases, had years to provide documentation requested by the court, including internal company emails.

HuffPost was the first to report the start of Jones’ Sandy Hook legal woes in 2018 when parents Leonard Pozner and Veronique De La Rosa filed a defamation lawsuit related to Jones’ continued lies that the 2012 school shooting that left 20 children and six adults dead was a “false flag” hoax filled with “crisis actors.”

Pozner and De La Rosa’s 6-year-old son, Noah, was killed in the shooting. In the years since, the parents have dealt with continued harassment from those who followed Jones’ lead and claimed the shooting was faked.


They’re not the only ones. In total, nine families who lost loved ones in the Sandy Hook shooting have leveled lawsuits against Jones and Infowars for the damage he and his outlet caused. Since then, Jones has lost multiple legal battles in his many lawsuits and was ordered to pay nearly $150,000 in legal fees in 2020 for failing to provide discovery documents for the plaintiffs.

It was Jones’ continued refusal to hand over discovery documents that led to Monday’s rulings against him in a lawsuit brought on by Pozner and a separate lawsuit by parent Scarlett Lewis, whose 6-year-old son, Jesse, was also killed in the shooting. Pozner, De La Rosa, and Lewis are being represented by Texas law firm Farrar & Ball, who told HuffPost that they are “not surprised by the Court’s decision.”

Jones’ most recent lawyer, Brad Reeves, told the Austin-American Statesman earlier this month that a default judgment against Jones would be a “hugely excessive” response to his discovery failures. Judge Gamble felt otherwise:

“Furthermore, in considering whether lesser remedies would be effective, this Court has also considered Defendants’ general bad faith approach to litigation, Mr. Jones’ public threats, and Mr. Jones’ professed belief that these proceedings are ‘show trials’,” the court rulings read.

Lawyer Bill Ogden with Farrar & Ball told HuffPost that Gamble’s default judgment ruling is “a bit of a myth” in the legal world.

“We learn about death penalty sanctions in law school as more of a theory, and it’s almost unheard of to have them handed down in a case like this,” Ogden said in an emailed statement. “However, the Sandy Hook cases are unique. It is extremely rare that a party (Alex Jones and Infowars) is ordered by the Court to comply with discovery, is sanctioned for failing to obey with the Court’s multiple Order(s), and then continues to blatantly disregard the Court’s authority by continuously refusing to comply.”

While Jones has now claimed he no longer believes the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax, the damage had already been done. In 2017, Florida woman Lucy Richards was sentenced to five months in prison for sending threats to Pozner.

“You gonna die,” Richards told Pozner in one recorded voicemail message. “Death is coming to you real soon.”
As part of her sentence, Richards was ordered not to access Infowars.
Jones’ cataclysmic court losses are unsurprising to those who have followed his cases. In a 2019 deposition, Jones was unable to recall basic facts about the school shooting, including the date that it happened.
“I talk four hours a day, and I can’t remember what I talked about sometimes a week ago,” Jones said in the deposition.
Reached by phone Thursday, Jones’ lawyer, Reeves, told HuffPost he had no comment regarding the decision.
“I haven’t really analyzed [the rulings], so I don’t know exactly what is going to happen,” Reeves said.
 
Stop trying to post like this is an abortion thread and you're Muh Vagina. You have no idea what you're talking about and are utterly embarrassing yourself.
 

For the last time, there is a fine line of when a person becomes a character and said ramifications from that "character" can go far in taste and decency. I personally believe that Jones is going too far with the "crisis actors" shtick for the sake of entertainment as an alternative news source.

He is free to do what he wants. There are people that will think otherwise and for good reason. If it's a character, then I would argue it's turning into Poe's Law territory with how committed one is towards a belief despite evidence proving otherwise.
 
100% wrong about Sandy Hook.
🐑 🐑 🐑
taste and decency
Screenshot_20211001-113949_Brave_1.png

Just to remind you.
 
That wouldn't work and would be debated as libel as they are a major news source. That's why debunking sites exist. More importantly, it helps yourself to fact check yourself.
Debunking sites exist for the sole purpose of narrative control.

Speaking of, your argument falls apart as to why people like Jones should be censored when you consider that the censorship of them only strengthens the convictions of the people who watch his stuff as true believers. A big part of the psychology of conspiracy theorists (actual) is that they're sold that it's information "THEY don't want YOU to know!".

Censorship of ideas never works and always backfires. Drives it and the people who espouse/believe them underground and out of the way of criticism and rebuttal while strengthening their resolve in the beliefs they have, not to mention it's flat-out both intellectual cowardice and admitting that you don't trust other people to make their own decisions with regards to information. It's the moral, political, and intellectual equivalent of sweeping a problem under the rug and hoping the lump doesn't bother you too much.
 
Censorship of ideas never works and always backfires. Drives it and the people who espouse/believe them underground and out of the way of criticism and rebuttal while strengthening their resolve in the beliefs they have, not to mention it's flat-out both intellectual cowardice and admitting that you don't trust other people to make their own decisions with regards to information.
I see your point. Alternative information has often turned into conspiracy because anything can be said and travelled into cyberspace to the gullible and fickle. Once again, the best way to combat that is to fact check yourself and not engage into that discourse as it'll just turn into going into circles ad nauseam.

e6122537e3b93f7a0b25363173b78be1.gif


I do not know the endgame with Jones or the defense of this particular case, but I personally think it's treading a fine line. Part of me doesn't want to care beyond this discussion, but that's just my ignorance.
 
That wouldn't work and would be debated as libel as they are a major news source. That's why debunking sites exist. More importantly, it helps yourself to fact check yourself.
Rachel Maddow & MSNBC Beat One America News Network Again In $10M Defamation Battle

If someone can dig out the actual judge's ruling, IIRC Deadline dances around some of the language the Court used here, they essentially said Maddow wasn't responsible for what she said since nobody believes her in the first place. Despite her prefacing her statements with "literally."

There's a similar case out there with Tucker Carlson.

The ‘Tucker Carlson defense’


Vyskocil’s decision has become what is now called “the Tucker Carlson defense”. The lies that Tucker Carlson asserts on his Fox News show are not slanderous because any “reasonable” person would know that he lies. He is protected under his First Amendment free speech rights.

Alex Jones is certainly a buffoon, but what did he say or I guess do that Carlson and Maddow did not?
 
I like how he's going around in circles and trying to avoid admitting he said something stupid.

Posted in the Elder Scrolls thread too much I suspect.
 
His stupid persona caused a lot of harassment to vicims' families. I'm on the fence over how much of a character Alex Jones is since he only admitted to being a character during divorce and custody proceedings.
Be careful, you may be faced with discourse.

I don't think he's a character; I think he's serious.

I like how he's going around in circles and trying to avoid admitting he said something stupid.

Posted in the Elder Scrolls thread too much I suspect.


Reading and debating takes a lot outta me. I need a new character.
 

Attachments

  • 75pl.gif
    75pl.gif
    1.9 MB · Views: 14
Last edited:
MSNBC and so on caused mass peaceful protests riots to continue by framing it the way they did. The harassment excuse is pathetically weak.
 
MSNBC and so on caused mass peaceful protests riots to continue by framing it the way they did. The harassment excuse is pathetically weak.
Which is accepted as fact by its viewers and they know it. Despite evidence proving otherwise, they are committed to that spin enough to suppress information that goes against the grain. That's my point of having misinformation spread like wildfire enough to having refutable evidence "disproven" by gullible people because they tune in.
 
Back
Top Bottom