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

Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 787 posts

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#401

Post by advisedwang »

TigeriusKirk wrote: post #148
AlexandrB wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should look at the theatrics Alex engaged in during the trial as well as his repeated failure to provide documents during discovery. He was arguably incompetently represented[1] (Infowars is probably going to sue their lawyer[2]) while treating the trial(s) as both a joke or a conspiracy against him. With that kind of behaviour, I'm not sure what kind of outcome he expected - him and his legal team failed…

I am explicitly not siding with Alex Jones in any way.

You think he should be fined less. That is siding with him in result.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#402

Post by polotics »

zackees wrote: post #24
ivraatiems wrote: post #4

This is great news, but we should temper our expectations: It's likely that Jones will appeal and keep this tied up for years before he has to pay anything. Even if he is eventually obligated to pay some amount, it is unlikely to be what the jury just decided. And even if it is what the jury just decided, Jones' company is already "bankrupt" (yet still on the air) and he will almost certainly avoid liability through…

Quoted post unavailable.

The difference between your theory ("say the wrong words") and practice (weaponizing the Sandy Hook massacre to industrially harness victim-blaming for maximum profit) is why having a fair trial by jury protects us from dictatorship and totalitarianism. You may have a point about failed societies, that ship has sailed.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#403

Post by voisin »

polotics wrote: post #371
thaumasiotes wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Defamation law has always existed and people can always sue you for libel and slander. But a $965 million dollar judgment for libel or slander would have to be justified by comparable damages. That isn't the case here.

Comparable damage? Can you imagine your young daughter one days goes to school, never comes back because she bled to death in a corridor there, and then for years you get attacked by strangers claiming you made it all up and are a fake? One thing I really don't understand about the US of A is, while it is abominously violent, still, a pork like Alex Jones hasn't been physically attacked by anyone. It's like there's a…

Isn’t that what it will amount to? He’ll declare bankruptcy and everything he’s got will go to settling some fraction of these lawsuits.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#404

Post by ep103 »

rglover wrote: post #387
mdp2021 wrote: post #323

Can somebody explain the statement from the lawyer, as reported by Axios: > «We disagree with the basis of the default, we disagree with the court’s evidentiary rulings. In more than 200 trials in the course of my career I have never seen a trial like this», Pattis added. «Today is a very, very dark day for freedom of speech» given that another bullet states > claimed the shooting was a "false flag" operation planned…

It's a statement of opinion which perfectly fits under the guise of free speech. I can claim that McDonald's hamburgers are made of cat meat to lower prices and it's the exact same thing. It's only because it's political (and Jones is a perennial example to be paraded about as the standard for "evil far-right conservative extremist" thought) that it gets contorted into what it has. This will predictably bite people i…

It is a statement of my opinion, that rglover is a pedophile, that has personally been involved in sodomizing children in the greater New York metropolitan area, and does so frequently while working on plans to do terrorist activities in that city with a shadowy cabal of mostly (insert ethnicity here) figures.

Now, my kind viewers on Hacker News, I have to attest that these are just my opinions, and as such, I cannot strongly recommend that this viewership immediately find out rglover's personal information and regularly and constantly forward that information to the New York City Metropolitan Police Department's phone numbers for anti-terrorism or crime prevention (available here: https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/investigative/investi...).

Thank god, where we live in a type of society where, as rglover describes, I am free to make any statements I please, in any manner I please, and claim protection under the right to free speech, and things like defamation and libel law simply do not exist.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#405

Post by tptacek »

loceng wrote: post #393
badwolf wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He caused his fans to harass families of murdered children for years, several had to move, some multiple times. All the while Alex Jones was raking in millions in cash off it.

How did he cause his fans to harass families? Did he specifically brigade families or tell people to go after them?

Remarkably: yes, that seems to have been the case.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#406

Post by dragontamer »

tptacek wrote: post #367
dragontamer wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a lawyer, do I can't say with much confidence what most "defamation cases" are. But LII at least suggests that the law as written, is about negligence: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation EDIT: According to LII on libel: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/libel , there seems to be different awards for negligence, recklessness, and malice. Negligence is capped at actual injury, while recklessness and above…

(1) No, again, the damages announced today are compensatory, not punitive. (2) If we're talking about the "actual malice" standard, then the standard is recklessness, not negligence. (3) None of that matters here, because Jones lost the trial by default (the evidence would have clearly shown Jones to have met the actual malice standard, but it's a moot point).

Thanks for your clarifications.

> (2) If we're talking about the "actual malice" standard, then the standard is recklessness, not negligence.

My understanding is that "actual malice" only applies to public figures. Not private figures?

EDIT: I should note that I'm working off of roughly high-school journalism + high school law levels of analysis here. I recognize I'm no expert in this subject, but we were forced to study this topic in my Journalism class before we were allowed to publish the school newspaper. I can believe it if my teacher was being extra-conservative with regards to the subjects we were allowed to cover.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#407

Post by HyperSane »

unknownaccount wrote: post #388
saltminer wrote: post #23

As someone who's been closely following the Infowars/Free Speech Systems trials (watched all the depos, trial footage, etc.), all I can say is that I'm glad these families are finally getting justice. Even though I'm sure it'll be tied up in appeals for awhile (and reduced on appeal), hopefully it'll prevent future harassment campaigns against families when tragedies occur. And before anyone says "but why wasn't Jone…

Quoted post unavailable.

They aren't independent actors because they were highly impressionable people whose actions were influenced by Jone's lies.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#408

Post by mostafas »

unknownaccount wrote: post #388
saltminer wrote: post #23

As someone who's been closely following the Infowars/Free Speech Systems trials (watched all the depos, trial footage, etc.), all I can say is that I'm glad these families are finally getting justice. Even though I'm sure it'll be tied up in appeals for awhile (and reduced on appeal), hopefully it'll prevent future harassment campaigns against families when tragedies occur. And before anyone says "but why wasn't Jone…

Quoted post unavailable.

Did Hitler personally kill any Jews? Did Putin personally kill any Ukrainians?

Sorry to invoke Godwin's law so early.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#409

Post by anigbrowl »

entiex wrote: post #335
shadowgovt wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this particular venue, damages were determined by the jury (which is not the case in all states). Relevant to that process, Jones took the stand in his own defense, to show remorse and indicate why the jury should find for a lower penalty, and... Did the opposite of that. He lost his temper and managed to strongly indicate he had learned nothing and showed no remorse. Juries tend to take a particularly dim view of…

But these aren't puntive damages, they're compensatory damages, and plainly excessive ones at that. Alex Jones level of remorse has no bearing on the level of damage he caused, and so should have no bearing on the amount of compensatory damages. To the extent that they did, that's an injustice. These damages are absolutely insane for emotional distress and defamation. The average lifetime earnings of a US citizen are…

Is it really absurd? Losing a child to murder is already an awful outcome that most people never experience. Being accused of participating in conspiracy/cover up and told your child never existed makes that significantly worse. It would be horrible if some random crazy did that, but to have it done to you by a well-resourced media organization with nationwide reach and millions of devoted fans is the stuff of nightmares.

Re: Alex Jones told to pay $965M damages to Sandy Hook victims' families

#410

Post by JellyBeanThief »

unknownaccount wrote: post #388
saltminer wrote: post #23

As someone who's been closely following the Infowars/Free Speech Systems trials (watched all the depos, trial footage, etc.), all I can say is that I'm glad these families are finally getting justice. Even though I'm sure it'll be tied up in appeals for awhile (and reduced on appeal), hopefully it'll prevent future harassment campaigns against families when tragedies occur. And before anyone says "but why wasn't Jone…

Quoted post unavailable.

He's not on trial for harassment.
Post reply on HN