Live data from Hacker News

Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim

bbc.co.uk

21–30 of 360 posts

Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim

#21
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defamation, Slander, etc. None are protected. Free speech protects you from the Government, not your fellow citizens.

The court is part of the government.

The court oversaw the case. It did not bring it.

Example: I specifically prohibit peanuts in my kitchen, because I serve meals to allergic children. You sneak peanuts into the kitchen. I sue you and win.

Does this mean "Peanuts are illegal"? No. I have a civil action and we have a system of civil courts wherein these grievances can be aired and adjudicated.

Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim

#22
post #2

Ignoring that Jones is a garbage human and just focusing on the case: that isn’t protected free speech? I don’t know all the rules around when speech isn’t protected but the article doesn’t really cover why this wasn’t. Does this set a precedent that anyone who spouts conspiracy theories about an event is targetable by those who suffered from that event?

Defamation is not protected under the first amendment.

Jones might have had a credible defense against the allegations of defamation (I haven't bothered to read the original complaint or any of the motions)--and defamation is notoriously hard for the plaintiffs to win in the US--but he was so uncooperative during discovery that he had a default judgement entered against him, meaning the only thing the jury had to decide was how much damages to award.

Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim

#23
Actually, no, the jury verdict on punitive damages is $45.2 million, but that is certain to be reduced before Jones is ordered to pay (there seems to be some dispute over whether a portion of the compensatory damages award is economic or not, and depending on the answer on that, the cap under Texas statutory punitive damages caps would seem to be somewhere between $750k and $1m; even if the plaintiffs succeed in their plan to challenge the statutory caps as unconstitutional and the cap that applies is 10× compensatory, as they have suggested it should be, that would cap punitive at $41 million.)

The $50m is adding the punitive and compensatory verdicts, neither of which are yet part of a judgement he has been ordered to pay.

On the other hand, this case involves 2 parents. There is a larger case in Connecticut that doesn't face Texas punitive damages caps that he has also suffered default on and will face damages, as well as another Texas case.

Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim

#29
post #2

Ignoring that Jones is a garbage human and just focusing on the case: that isn’t protected free speech? I don’t know all the rules around when speech isn’t protected but the article doesn’t really cover why this wasn’t. Does this set a precedent that anyone who spouts conspiracy theories about an event is targetable by those who suffered from that event?

It doesn't mean anything for protected free speech because:

1) as other commenters have pointed out, this is for defamation against the parents for saying they were actors, sending "reporters" to harass them, etc.

2) He lost the defamation case by default for repeatedly refusing to comply with the court pre-trial. This trial was solely to determine damages.

> On September 27, 2021, a district judge in Texas issued three default judgments against Jones, requiring him to pay all damages in two lawsuits. These rulings came after Jones repeatedly failed to hand over documents and evidence as ordered by the court, which the judge characterized as "flagrant bad faith and callous disregard for the responsibilities of discovery under the rules."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones#Sandy_Hook_school_s...

Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim

#30
The judge found him guilty of withholding evidence and did a summary judgement of guilty, and moved to the damages portion with a jury.

Which is strange, skipping over the evidence trial and going straight to damages. They didnt say what the evidence being withheld was, and no video evidence against him.

Thats what would have been interesting to see, the videos the case was based on.

Banes Law did a good comment on the case @ https://files.catbox.moe/rsy84f.mp4

Post reply on HN