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

61–70 of 360 posts

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

#61

Post by eyelidlessness »

dragonwriter wrote: post #14
ericmcer wrote: 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?

> Ignoring that Jones is a garbage human and just focusing on the case: that isn’t protected free speech? No, while there are Constitutional limits (especially when the injured party is a public figure, see NY Times v. Sullivan ), deliberate and often also reckless, harmful falsehood is not protected speech. > Does this set a precedent that anyone who spouts conspiracy theories about an event is targetable by those w…

> deliberate and often also reckless, harmful falsehood is not protected speech

IANAL (I am not a lawyer; and IANAAJA—I am not an Alex Jones apologist), but I think deserves qualification. My understanding is that it’s not the falsehood which is restricted, it’s the damage caused by purveying the falsehood. If I’m not mistaken I can claim (anywhere under US jurisdiction, unless under oath or otherwise legally sworn to be truthful) that I have a cat (I don’t) without any legal risk to 1A protection whatsoever. Granted, that could raise other eyebrows which might gain legal force if I persisted, presumably around competency to care for myself (or my dog, who I assure you does exist).

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

#62

Post by callmeal »

IronWolve wrote: post #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 t…

That's actually a pretty bad comment - they commentators have no idea what they're talking about, and one of them even says "... assume it's the same under the US law" and goes on to disrepect the " ... judge, whatever her name is".

Really, is this what you consider a "good comment"?

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

#63

Post by gpm »

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…

The plaintiffs attorney has talked about this to reporters twice that I've seen

Time 1: https://twitter.com/dansolomon/status/1555308565715451904

Time 2: https://twitter.com/averytravistv/status/1555692735906349057

In the first video (which was from before the jury announced what they though were appropriate punitive damages) says "10, 15 times" compensatory damages, $50m is below the upper end of that. The 10x you quote just seems to be the lower end of what he suggested the limit might be.

The second video discusses what the statutory cap is (they think $750k per claim, $4.5m total)/that they don't think it's constitutional. Also that they don't think this will be directly litigated like it usually would, but be adjudicated by the bankruptcy court.

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

#64

Post by TechBro8615 »

api wrote: post #33
pessimizer wrote: post #10

I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories he wants whether or not he believes them himself, but he slandered the parents of dead children to the degree that some of the most insane and aggressive people in the world think that they're the agents of a world conspiracy with the intent to enslave the planet. $50 mil is a light judgement.

That's the difference between free speech and malicious libel and slander. Jones is a total psychopath. What he did to those grieving families is just beyond despicable. Mentally abusing children who survived a murder rampage is way way beyond just dirty politics, propagandizing, and typical grifting.

No post body was provided.

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

#65

Post by Daishiman »

wyager wrote: post #57
api wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the difference between free speech and malicious libel and slander. Jones is a total psychopath. What he did to those grieving families is just beyond despicable. Mentally abusing children who survived a murder rampage is way way beyond just dirty politics, propagandizing, and typical grifting.

Quoted post unavailable.

Why are you asking this over and over when you're just a couple of Google searches away from both trial videos and his damaging content?

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

#66

Post by jcranmer »

toolz wrote: post #49
pessimizer wrote: post #10

I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories he wants whether or not he believes them himself, but he slandered the parents of dead children to the degree that some of the most insane and aggressive people in the world think that they're the agents of a world conspiracy with the intent to enslave the planet. $50 mil is a light judgement.

The lawsuit was filed in 2018 and Jones has multiple videos as early (maybe earlier) as 2016. I'm not sure how this makes any sense. I think Jones is disgusting and pushing paranoia and fear for a living is disgusting, but I can't understand any world where it's just that a person makes a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement, explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple yea…

> a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement

The standard for defamation in the case of public figures (for which the parents of the Sandy Hook victims probably qualify because it's that broad) is "actual malice"--the speaker needs to either know that the statement was false (at the time it was made) or entertained serious doubts as to its veracity. For non-public figures, it's generally lowered to "reckless negligence". The other required element for defamation is that it has to be damaging--you need to show that you suffered as a result of the allegedly defamatory statement.

If it's at the point where the statement is causing people to issue death threats against you, it's not a "potentially genuine mistake".

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

#67

Post by dragonwriter »

toolz wrote: post #49
pessimizer wrote: post #10

I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories he wants whether or not he believes them himself, but he slandered the parents of dead children to the degree that some of the most insane and aggressive people in the world think that they're the agents of a world conspiracy with the intent to enslave the planet. $50 mil is a light judgement.

The lawsuit was filed in 2018 and Jones has multiple videos as early (maybe earlier) as 2016. I'm not sure how this makes any sense. I think Jones is disgusting and pushing paranoia and fear for a living is disgusting, but I can't understand any world where it's just that a person makes a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement, explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple yea…

> but I can't understand any world where it's just that a person makes a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement, explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple years after correcting that mistake is sued.

Had Jones wanted to make the argument that he made a genuine mistake rather than knowing libel, he could have participated in discovery and trial rather than stonewalling and getting a default judgement.

Had he wanted to argue that he had made an after the fact retraction which reduced the damages suffered by the victims of his libel, he had the opportunity to make that argument, AFAIK, in the compensatory damages phase.

> Intent matters and after watching the trial I have very little understanding how the jury came to that verdict other than they just wanted to punish a bad person any way they could.

There is a reason punitive damages are called punitive: they aren't to compensate for harm, they are to punish, and thereby deter repeats of the action by the same or other parties.

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

#68

Post by dragonwriter »

jcranmer wrote: post #66
toolz wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lawsuit was filed in 2018 and Jones has multiple videos as early (maybe earlier) as 2016. I'm not sure how this makes any sense. I think Jones is disgusting and pushing paranoia and fear for a living is disgusting, but I can't understand any world where it's just that a person makes a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement, explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple yea…

> a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement The standard for defamation in the case of public figures (for which the parents of the Sandy Hook victims probably qualify because it's that broad) is "actual malice"--the speaker needs to either know that the statement was false (at the time it was made) or entertained serious doubts as to its veracity. For non-public figures, it's generally lowered to "rec…

> The standard for defamation in the case of public figures (for which the parents of the Sandy Hook victims probably qualify because it's that broad) is "actual malice"

That's true, but also somewhat irrelevant since Jones suffered default due to wilfully refusing to comply with court process; there was no trial on liability, only damages.

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

#69

Post by vkou »

dragonwriter wrote: post #67
toolz wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lawsuit was filed in 2018 and Jones has multiple videos as early (maybe earlier) as 2016. I'm not sure how this makes any sense. I think Jones is disgusting and pushing paranoia and fear for a living is disgusting, but I can't understand any world where it's just that a person makes a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement, explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple yea…

> but I can't understand any world where it's just that a person makes a potentially genuine mistake in their opinion/judgement, explicitly corrects that mistake multiple times and then only multiple years after correcting that mistake is sued. Had Jones wanted to make the argument that he made a genuine mistake rather than knowing libel, he could have participated in discovery and trial rather than stonewalling and…

> he had the opportunity to make that argument, AFAIK, in the compensatory damages phase.

Or in the years between when he started his smear campaign, and the consequences thereof finally catching up to him.

Between this and the Tim Eynman verdict[1] (Who pretty much followed the same legal playbook, up to filing for bankruptcy[2]), it's not been a great week for grifters.

[1] https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/judge-orders-eyman...

[2] And then trying to take back that filing. When he realized that you can't use it to hide your stolen money from the courts. [3]

[3] https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/bankruptcy-judge-a...

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

#70

Post by gerdesj »

pessimizer wrote: post #10

I'm a supporter of Jones being able to spread whatever insane theories he wants whether or not he believes them himself, but he slandered the parents of dead children to the degree that some of the most insane and aggressive people in the world think that they're the agents of a world conspiracy with the intent to enslave the planet. $50 mil is a light judgement.

"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 these horrific murders. This wasn't simply the usual run of the mill "American conspiracy theory".

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. He was caught out rather neatly when his defence team sent rather too much SMS data to the prosecution.

I am a fervent supporter of freedom of speech and other fundamental rights but there have to be boundaries - of reasonable decency and other quite tricky to pin down terms.

Post reply on HN