Live data from Hacker News

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

bbc.co.uk

241–250 of 787 posts

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

#241
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm less certain. It looks like this mostly hinges on the bankruptcy filings, which weren't going great for Jones (as, of course, they should not, as they seem pretty bogus).

Bankruptcy notwithstanding, he almost certainly does not have $1B. He's a celebrity figure of sorts, but pretty fringe. It's a symbolic victory. He'll have to liquidate the bulk of whatever assets he may have, and the plaintiffs will get a few dollars when it's all said and done.

No, it seems like he has personal assets in the high tens of millions of dollars, and that Free Speech Systems was probably worth into the 9 figures. If the verdict stands, all of that will get wiped out, and the question remaining will be whether the damages, which stem from an intentional tort, will be dischargeable when Jones is forced into bankruptcy non-ironically, rather than using it as a ploy.

Still a lot of "if's" here!

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

#242

Quoted post unavailable.

(a) Stuff like this is supremely unhelpful and corrosive to the thread. (b) It's obviously not the case that Jones is getting a sympathetic hearing from this thread; instead, you're noticing mostly the randos posting pro-Jones stuff that lives briefly before being flagged to the bottom of the site.

I think the poster has misidentified most people defending Jones in this thread as fans when they are more likely free speech absolutists who believe any government sanctioned consequence for speech is immoral.

They’d likely defend anyone who received a punishment for this type of behavior, Alex Jones just happens to be the man of the hour

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

#243

Quoted post unavailable.

> That is an unreasonable sum

I disagree. Many of these families need security and barriers to prevent Alex Jones' fans from attacking them. A lot of folks were impacted by his outrageous claims.

> To put it into perspective, the top 100 biggest company fines in the world start at around 1 billion (give or take 200mil).

Fines for companies doing wrong are far too small.

> Alex Jones is NOT the same as some of the biggest companies in the world.

InfoWars store alone generated 165 million in 3 years time. They pull in a lot of cash. And this penalty should prevent him from ever running a media business again, or it has failed.

> the establishment wants to shut Alex down for speaking the truth.

ah :(

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

#244
post #59
post #6

I'm sure that will get reduced by the judge based on whatever state law, but it's a huge signal to Jones that he's an absolute monster.

The decisions of the courts are, by a wide margin, much more influenced by one's relationship with the regime than by one's relationship with morality.

Ideally, courts are concerned with legality, not morality.

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

#245
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

>Say the wrong words and get financially destroyed for ever... This is an incredibly disingenuous take on Jones' actions here. Edit: For additional context, OP has a history of direct ties to conspiracy theories, Project Veritas, etc.. See: their profile.

Perhaps it's cynical rather than disingenuous. ~30% of people derive more satisfaction from seeing someone worse off than they do from mutual benefit - not even a zero-sum mindset, but a negative-sum one because such people are willing to incur a loss as long as it correlates with someone else experiencing a greater loss.

Put this depressing fact together with a highly networked communications infrastructure, and you can see there's a big economic incentive to talk shit about others. The US has an entire media sector built around the opinion columnists and radio/TV hosts whose whole brand is aggressive belittlement of others, or bullying as entertainment.

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

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep saying "it couldn't happen to a nicer person" when it literally wouldn't happen to a nicer person

“It couldn’t have happened to a nicer person” and other variations are usually used in a facetious manner. Basically, it’s sarcasm. The people using this turn of phrase are effectively saying “good, he deserves it for being a bad person”.

Yes, the comment here is noting the irony of how those words apply differently here.

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

#247

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…

The only organ of society that really could hold him to account (and historically has held those such as him to account) would be broadcasters. Jones airs on the Genesis Communications Network, which could choose to cease to carry his content if it wanted. He'd drop into the obscurity of online self-publishing almost immediately.

(This thought feels familiar).

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

#248
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the lawyers made in the previous case what I consider an interesting argument: Alex Jones claimed under oath that his show reaches (off the top of my head) about a hundred million people. So the lawyer argued that Alex Jones should pay $1 for every person who heard him lie about Sandy Hook. By this measure, if I intentionally harass someone on Twitter I'd have to pay the victim about $50 (on a good day). Since…

If those were the reasonable standards, every media-company would be broke. I'd argue traditional media reaches many more people and the impact of intentional lies is that much greater.

well then maybe they’d be more careful about what they publish. being a big corporation should give you less rights than a singular person, not more

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

#249

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…

First amendment isn’t under attack. Alex Jones isn’t being punished by the govt. Ge attacked people, they responded back. Defamation law has always existed and people can always sue you for libel and slander.

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

#250
post #72

"CIVIL-RIGHTS LAWYER NARRATOR: But punitive-damages awards aren’t dischargeable in bankruptcy. So Alex Jones will be paying off these debts from wage garnishments, attachments, & sheriff’s sales of his stuff for the rest of his wretched, pathetic, worthless life." from: https://twitter.com/SubodhChandra/status/1580285453348921344

Honest question - could Jones sue Subodh Chandra for defamation given that his life was just valued at at least a billion dollars by a jury?
Post reply on HN