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

771–780 of 787 posts

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

#771

Post by mejari »

AlexandrB wrote: post #317
fareesh wrote: post #81

This is a good verdict - defamation in the media is a very serious problem. It's unfortunate that it took a person like Alex Jones to convince people of it. If anything he should not be taken seriously. Those who are taken seriously have gotten away with much worse by merely apologizing or correcting themselves (as he did as well). As for the amount - the highest fine paid by Wall Street firms for the 2008 crisis was…

I think there's a strong case that Alex's apologies were not genuine nor would result in changes in future behavior on air. Even as the first trial was wrapping up Alex was calling one of the plaintiffs "slow" and "manipulated by some very bad people."[1] [1] https://news.yahoo.com/alex-jones-railed-against-sandy-19364...

In fact he was just doing his show, showing the verdict being read, and mocking the father of one of the slain children's reaction. I can think of no stronger proof that any apologies given were not genuine.

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

#772

Post by akerl_ »

koshergweilo wrote: post #767
akerl_ wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just so we’re on the same page, “fire in a crowded theater” was coined as part of the Supreme Court’s upholding of a conviction for protesting the draft during WW1. The decision is no longer really relevant, having been replaced in a later case with a revised test that requires that the speech in question is intended to, and likely to cause, imminent lawless action. Which is for the best, because the Schenck decision…

Oh I agree, it doesn't apply to this particular case but it is the textbook definition of a reasonable limit on free speech. The poster I was replying to seemed to be under the impression that the first amendment protected all forms of speech. As you said, the courts have carved out many exceptions to the first amendment.

Except it’s not the textbook definition. Shouting fire in a crowded theater is protected by the 1st amendment, and the case where the phrase was coined has been replaced by better 1st amendment tests for whether speech can be punished by the government.

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

#773

Post by saltminer »

thwayunion wrote: post #711
dukeofdoom wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make the comparison because the judge denied Alex a jury trial, based on him not turning over evidence, and not him missing court dates. Some of the evidence he failed to turn over is financial data. The argument made was that the lack of this evidence would prejudice the jury from finding Alex guilty. The judge sided with the prosecution on this so she defaulted him. Specifically the prosecution was making the arg…

You. Cannot. Ignore. Discovery. Seriously. Cannot. In a criminal case, this is equivalent to standing in your doorway and physically blocking the police from executing a lawful warrant. Except, in that case, the police have recourse -- they can push you aside and execute a search. That isn't possible in civil cases; the only power a court has to compel cooperation with discovery is threatening a default judgement. Th…

Thank you for putting this more eloquently than I could. To say the judges have been lenient with Infowars is an understatement - if you or I were in a civil suit, we would have been defaulted far quicker than Jones was because the judges wouldn't have to worry about a media circus spiraling out from it. Jones did not just throw out a discovery request assuming it was junk mail one time, this was completely intentional and forced the court's hand.

In the Texas trial, I believe Andino Reynal (the counsel at trial) was the 13th attorney they had retained. Yes, 13. At this point, I'm convinced Alex Jones is right up there with Faketoshi as the worst client you could ever have.

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

#774

Post by dukeofdoom »

thwayunion wrote: post #711
dukeofdoom wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make the comparison because the judge denied Alex a jury trial, based on him not turning over evidence, and not him missing court dates. Some of the evidence he failed to turn over is financial data. The argument made was that the lack of this evidence would prejudice the jury from finding Alex guilty. The judge sided with the prosecution on this so she defaulted him. Specifically the prosecution was making the arg…

You. Cannot. Ignore. Discovery. Seriously. Cannot. In a criminal case, this is equivalent to standing in your doorway and physically blocking the police from executing a lawful warrant. Except, in that case, the police have recourse -- they can push you aside and execute a search. That isn't possible in civil cases; the only power a court has to compel cooperation with discovery is threatening a default judgement. Th…

The contention from his lawyers was that no other libel case again a media company resulted in them having to turn over as much data as Alex had to. That he turned over multiple gigabytes of data. So to say he "ignored discovery" is probably not what happened here. Just the fact that he sat through 10 days of depositions, imagine getting interrogated for 10 days. Has to be close to torturous.

Turning over all your email/phone data, your financial records, email and phone data from all your employees, and still being asked for more and more. I doubt the NY times, or CNN would ever be forced to turn over all their employee emails in a libel case.

Eventually he wasn't going to able to turn over something. For example he may have not had google analytics to his youtube channel that youtube took down.

You yourself might assume that Alex was going to get a fair trial if he cooperated more with discover. But is that even a reasonable assumption. His own lawyers may have know that this was a political case he was going to lose no matter what, if the discovery process was already unusually intrusive.

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

#775

Post by dukeofdoom »

saltminer wrote: post #773
thwayunion wrote: post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You. Cannot. Ignore. Discovery. Seriously. Cannot. In a criminal case, this is equivalent to standing in your doorway and physically blocking the police from executing a lawful warrant. Except, in that case, the police have recourse -- they can push you aside and execute a search. That isn't possible in civil cases; the only power a court has to compel cooperation with discovery is threatening a default judgement. Th…

Thank you for putting this more eloquently than I could. To say the judges have been lenient with Infowars is an understatement - if you or I were in a civil suit, we would have been defaulted far quicker than Jones was because the judges wouldn't have to worry about a media circus spiraling out from it. Jones did not just throw out a discovery request assuming it was junk mail one time, this was completely intention…

> To say the judges have been lenient with Infowars is an understatement

The man was fined more than any other person in the history of humanity for saying words. A billion dollars! pharmaceutical companies that knowingly and willfully killed people have not been fined to such an extent.

And yet Alex was denied the ability to say words in his defence during his trial. "words" like "I'm innocent".

Citizens respect the outcomes of trials not because they follow a some set procedure, but because they think justice happened.

In major political case, in which a a populist talk show host, questioned the official narrative around an event. The state would not allow him to have his say, to raise constitutional issues. While the prosecution spent days talking about things he wasn't allowed to, and opened the trial by telling the jury this is their opportunity to take away Alex's megaphone, to silence him forever.

Alex might need to leave America, like Snowden, and continue his talk show abroad. Will the freest country in the world confiscate his passport to prevent that from happening.

This is a battle for public opinion. You might think you won this, but you haven't really.

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

#776

Post by HyperSane »

Georgelemental wrote: post #545
HyperSane wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Ah yes, we should let the government decide that some people are "highly impressionable" and therefore not human beings with agency or rights. That's definitely not a terrifying precedent to set, nothing to see here

No, we let the courts decide and they did. Jones isn't being sent to prison, he is just being forced to compensate the people his blatant lying harmed. I bet if Jones had spent the last 10 years constantly saying that you ate babies and this caused people to track you down and harass you then you would want him to stop and compensate you.

The only terrifying precedent is to allow shameless grifters like Alex Jones to lie with complete impunity no matter how much harm his lies cause.

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

#777

Post by [deleted] »

Georgelemental wrote: post #545
HyperSane wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Ah yes, we should let the government decide that some people are "highly impressionable" and therefore not human beings with agency or rights. That's definitely not a terrifying precedent to set, nothing to see here

[deleted]

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

#778

Post by HyperSane »

unknownaccount wrote: post #413
HyperSane wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

This is what the erosion of personal responsibility and accountability looks like. Alex Jones isnt responsible if stupid impressionable people watch his show and do stupid things. That is absurd and absolutely chilling in regards to free speech. Perhaps it even sets a new precedent that everyone who posts a comment/video/podcast online is now responsible for any illegal actions that any of their viewer commit.

"Alex Jones isnt responsible if stupid impressionable people watch his show and do stupid things. "

He absolutely is.

"This is what the erosion of personal responsibility and accountability looks like. "

Quite the opposite, Jones is being being made accountable for the harm he caused the parents of the Sandy Hook victims.

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

#779

Post by HyperSane »

unknownaccount wrote: post #464
helf wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh here we go… rolls eyes This is not “chilling to free speech”. Spewing hatred and demonstrably false utter bullshit and stirring up people knowingly is what he has and continues to do. Just like any number of other sociopathic fuckwits out there and through the ages. “Personal responsibility and accountability “ is exacty what he’s being held accountable for because /his/ actions, /his/ drivel, /his/ psychotic vitr…

Alex Jones wasnt the mastermind who created this conspiracy theory. The crisis actors conspiracy theory was already popular on the internet a couple days after the incident, months to years before Alex Jones covered it. There were numerous people speculating at the time about some strange discrepencies in the official narrative and footage which was able to convince some otherwise very reasonable people that there wa…

"Alex Jones wasnt the mastermind who created this conspiracy theory."

But he constantly repeated it using his very loud platform in an effort to make money.

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

#780

Post by 9935c101ab17a66 »

scarab92 wrote: post #574
tptacek wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not obvious to me at all. Can a 9-figure media and supplements company inflict 25-50 million dollars on an individual? Sure they can. Selling the memory of a parent's murdered child and defaming them to the point where they are followed into different states by lunatics threatening their lives seems to easily cross that threshold. How disruptive would it be to my life if that happened to me? Over how many year…

I don't see how a company can inflict $25 million in damages per person. Damages for wrongful death usually don't even go this high.

Well, to be frank, it doesn't matter. Some people probably think any kind of damages for defamation are ridiculous. Others probably think this wasn't enough. It doesn't matter though, because you weren't selected to serve on the jury at the trial. You didn't see the evidence, you didn't get to observe jones' conduct, you didn't sit through days and days of testimony about how horrible and traumatic it was for the families of sandy hook to lose their children and then be called 'crisis actors' by Alex Jones repeatedly. His followers were literally harassing the parents in public.

These damages may be above average and the highest ever in a defamation trial, but Alex Jones really took being a defamatory piece of shit to a new level.

Post reply on HN