Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 360 posts

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

#111

Post by throwawaylinux »

roenxi wrote: post #108
dragonwriter wrote: post #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 thei…

If Jones can afford to pay any of these figures that it says interesting things about how ineffective deplatforming is and really rather undermines the "big tech is a monopoly!" argument. Most people can't make $4 million in a lifetime, let alone these figures.

No post body was provided.

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

#112

Post by graywh »

wyager wrote: post #100
Beltalowda wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He claimed loudly and often for years; "at one point" makes it sound like an off-hand remark he made once or twice, but that's not really the case. He started backpeddling the minute people filled suit, as any true man of principle fighting the bad guys would do. For years he made factual claims about specific people that are demonstrably and provably untrue (i.e. that they're "crisis actors" who faked the lot), whic…

Quoted post unavailable.

the shooting was in 2012 and the lawsuits were filed in 2018

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

#113

Post by maximilianburke »

hunterb123 wrote: post #109
threeseed wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huge mess is an understatement. The phone conversations have also been handed over to the Jan 6 commission, FBI, DOJ etc.

You can't use leaked attorney/client information for investigations. The texts were from 2019 as well, not sure how they are relevant to J6. - 4A protects against unreasonable searches - 5A guarantees due process - 6A guarantees right to counsel Using leaked information from an attorney violates all three. -- EDIT -- > FireBeyond: 5A - due process - due process includes supplying all information. No it does not, you…

It's not a leak if the lawyers fuck up. The plaintiffs asked the defendents if they wanted to claim privilege on the contents and the defendents refused, the ball is in play.

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

#114

Post by FireBeyond »

roenxi wrote: post #108
dragonwriter wrote: post #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 thei…

If Jones can afford to pay any of these figures that it says interesting things about how ineffective deplatforming is and really rather undermines the "big tech is a monopoly!" argument. Most people can't make $4 million in a lifetime, let alone these figures.

He claimed that a judgment of $2M would bankrupt Infowars. But emails revealed that, at times, revenue was $800K -per day-, and the judge asked him to explain how potentially less than 3 days revenue would have that effect.

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

#115

Post by [deleted] »

rootusrootus wrote: post #76
kevinpet wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an incorrect analysis of where the conclusion comes from. Allowing the use of the courts to prohibit slander is a government action. Slander and libel are long standing exceptions to free speech. "Fighting words", espionage, contempt of court, or insubordination in the military are other exceptions that come to mind. The "the first amendment only applies to the government" is an argument that anyone is free t…

> The "the first amendment only applies to the government" is an argument "Congress shall make no law..." We've extrapolated a bunch from there, but the founding words are pretty clear.

[deleted]

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

#116

Post by golergka »

spuz wrote: post #98
golergka wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a minor Russian political activist and a lot of my friends have had to fled the country in order to avoid persecution. This case and the manner in which the trial has been conducted is night and day difference to what Russian state does to it's citizens. I don't have the time or endurance to describe all the details to you, but just as a simple example — a regional parliament member has been recently sentenced to…

What is it about this trial that stands out to you? I can tell you it's a very unusual example of a civil trial in the US so I'm not sure how it is supposed to compare with a criminal trial in Russia.

The fact that it is recorded and available to the wide audience. The fact that the prosecution actually had to present evidence. The fact that a wide audience actually cares about this trial. The fact that this trial is covered by the media. The fact that the whole trial takes more than half an hour. The fact that the defendant only risks his money but not his freedom.

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

#117

Post by hunterb123 »

maximilianburke wrote: post #113
hunterb123 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't use leaked attorney/client information for investigations. The texts were from 2019 as well, not sure how they are relevant to J6. - 4A protects against unreasonable searches - 5A guarantees due process - 6A guarantees right to counsel Using leaked information from an attorney violates all three. -- EDIT -- > FireBeyond: 5A - due process - due process includes supplying all information. No it does not, you…

It's not a leak if the lawyers fuck up. The plaintiffs asked the defendents if they wanted to claim privilege on the contents and the defendents refused, the ball is in play.

First off, his "fuck up" was leaking it, second it's still protected under attorney client privilege if AJ didn't authorize it.

Your attorney can't just leak (on purpose or accident) information you gave them and it be used against you.

Just because you don't like X person don't allow the government to step on everyone's inalienable rights.

If you went to trial for a traffic violation and your lawyer accidentally forwarded texts of you buying drugs, how would you feel being charged by the state for that crime?

-- EDIT --

> gpm: The law is explicit in this case that the attorney client privilege is waived by the attorney not asserting it within 10 days

Please cite what you are referring to.

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

#118

Post by krapp »

tootie wrote: post #106
gerdesj wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories" I think you are a supporter of freedom of speech in general - that's something I thoroughly approve of too. I also think you are able to understand the difference between seeing a horrendous crime and seeing that crime and attempting to profit from it. That seems to be what this bloke did: He tried to change and engorge the narrative regarding t…

I fervently believe that there's no practical way for government to regulate speech so they shouldn't try. If there were a magic way to stop people like Jones from talking that wouldn't chill free speech in general, I'd take it in a heartbeat. He's not contributing to the marketplace of ideas. He's spreading lies deliberately for his personal profit.

So you agree that Alex Jones is deliberately spreading lies for personal profit, and that this is harmful, but believe there shouldn't be any laws against it or any punishment for the consequences? Does that include the judgement he's facing now?

Governments have been regulating speech since the beginning of governments. Every society doesn't exist in a state of maximal speech oppression as a result, so it cannot be the case that any attempt to regulate speech chills free speech in general.

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

#119

Post by d0mine »

tootie wrote: post #106
gerdesj wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories" I think you are a supporter of freedom of speech in general - that's something I thoroughly approve of too. I also think you are able to understand the difference between seeing a horrendous crime and seeing that crime and attempting to profit from it. That seems to be what this bloke did: He tried to change and engorge the narrative regarding t…

I fervently believe that there's no practical way for government to regulate speech so they shouldn't try. If there were a magic way to stop people like Jones from talking that wouldn't chill free speech in general, I'd take it in a heartbeat. He's not contributing to the marketplace of ideas. He's spreading lies deliberately for his personal profit.

There is practical and very much effective way: it is called propaganda: you don't need to regulate speech if you can control what people think (and national security, wokeism will take care of the rest).

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

#120

Post by FireBeyond »

evan_ wrote: post #93
nemothekid wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple years after correcting that mistake is sued. Huh? Maybe I missed something, but I'm pretty sure he was still claiming Sandy Hook was a false flag on Joe Rogan as late as 2020

He claimed on the witness stand during the trial that the FBI was involved in the murders- and then later yelled at the mother that she was being manipulated by deep state agents. Any suggestion that he's "admitted it was 100% true" are BS. He seems to be allowing ( for now ) that people really died and at least some of the families were not actors, which is an improvement, but he's not really caught up to reality ye…

I suspect a good part of it is that he knows and knew all along, but he made his money this way, and now his thought process is (rightly or wrongly) that if he acts like he sincerely believed it, then it's less evil to have said what he said because he was 'mistaken' and not a piece of shit.
Post reply on HN