No post body was provided.
Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
121–130 of 360 posts
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#122Earlier 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 are plenty of very practical ways to legislate speech, we already do it all over the place.
We don't live in this legal abyss, most institutions make decisions for their business, but also for what they view to be higher, civic purposes.
Cable and Broadcast TV standards aren't just about profit maximization, they're kind of there to set a 'decency precedent'.
I mean, for the same reason you don't see 'porn everywhere' - you don't see the kinds of hyperbolic stuff Jones is saying all over the place.
Almost all organization have thresholds of various kinds, certainly Search, Social Media, Netflix, Cable/Broadcast in general, news outlets, Cable carriers, Academia yada yada.
The question will be perennially 'what to enforce and why' but we definitely already have standards.
Aside from fighting about the rules at various institutions, we then have 'legal' rules (a bit different), and of course we probably want to make sure there are at least some forums where anything can be said.
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Per the NYT [1], "his and Free Speech Systems’ combined net worth likely fell between $135 million and $270 million." So depending on what that split is, and how the court considers Free Speech Systems's worth in relation to him, that cap wouldn't necessarily apply. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/us/alex-jones-finances.ht...
Yes. I'm just pointing it out as a caveat because of his attempts to shield assets.
Many of his attempts have gone beyond 'shielding' to outright illegally hiding assets.
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#124"Bernard Pettingill told the court that records indicate Jones withdrew $62m for himself from his company in 2021 as his legal troubles grew." "The trial heard that Jones' business had earned about $800,000 in a single day selling diet supplements, gun paraphernalia and survivalist equipment." The court records here are great. I've never seen a good analysis on the economics of misinformation, especially the private…
I've been sort of flabbergasted at the amount of money involved. Evil pays quite well, apparently.
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#125Earlier 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.
[deleted]
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#126Earlier 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…
>> He tried to convince the world that the crime didn't actually happen and even worse tried to convince the world that the dead were actors and other nonsense. I'm a Jewish grandson of Holocaust survivors. I'm also American. I'm pretty happy our country has not adopted laws against holocaust denial in the way Germany or Canada have. I appreciate the thought behind those laws. But I appreciate freedom of speech more.…
i hope you're correct, but i suspect that swiss bank accounts, shell corporations, clever accountants and "gifting" money to friends and family will say otherwise.
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#127Ignoring 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?
The plaintiffs lawyer said is best, "Speech is free, but lies you have to pay for."
[deleted]
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#128Earlier 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…
This was information that should have been supplied during discovery. All that Jones supplied was the results of a simple search, which as we now know was only a small fraction of what should have been given.
5A - due process - due process includes supplying all information. Which Jones didn't do, and very arguably, the plaintiffs were entitled to this a long time ago. But this is unsurprising, as Jones has steadfastly interfered with, manipulated and otherwise messed with the discovery process.
Then the lawyer, after not doing so when asked by the plaintiffs, tried to claim to the court that it was all privileged information, and the judge said that it was plainly not, and that if he wanted to flag that which was subject to privilege, now, he could, but Jones's textual communications with other parties could in no way be classified as "attorney/client" as you state.
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
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).
No post body was provided.
Re: Alex Jones must pay $50m in punitive damages for Sandy Hook hoax claim
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Well stated.