Dude, if you threaten to start editing someone’s posts, either do it or don’t. That person can no longer converse with you.
Where was the threat of this happening?
On another topic.
Here:
I’m only partially aware of the facts, admitted. I was aware of the things you mentioned however. I guess I was under the impression that Alex Jones did NOT directly himself stalk or harm these people. Words are harmful and I DO NOT condone his behavior. However, its free speech to a point. I can say that if I were in the victims shoes I would have filed an injunction followed by a suit immediately as they did. My gut reaction, having personal experience in “emotional damage” type law suits is that the jury’s frequently award monetary settlements that make absolutely no sense.
2 Likes
For sure. And this is what Jones would have argued in a trial, undoubtedly. And I believe he would have had a leg to stand on. It’s why I think the damages would have been less had he actually had a trial in these cases. The jury would have heard this argument.
The problem for Jones was that he put himself in a position where he wasn’t allowed to make this argument. I actually think it’s very unfortunate. I would have liked to see how that played out in court.
1 Like
Lol. I have no desire to edit posts I simply disagree with, nor do I have any desire to edit YOUR posts. I told you that you were on the edge of violating the terms of service with your comment, and gave you a warning. I’m just doing my job here, you don’t have to like me for it. You’ve done nothing wrong in this thread, post editing was not on my mind.
On the cross.
Now he gets to play the victim of an overbearing justice system, nanny state yadda yadda, and his supporters will lap it up and remain captivated by the spectacle.
2 Likes
I think the jury awarded a ‘learn your lesson’ amount versus an appropriate amount which is not the point of a civil law suit. A civil suit, in an ideal world, is meant to compensate the plaintiff an equitable amount to the wrong doing of the defendant. Now, did anybody die as a result of Alex Jones? Even if they had the lifetime value of an average person’s earning potential is nowhere near the award here. Hell, we pretty much know what Alex Jones made 165 million from his media companies. Why not award that to the plaintiffs? Is it still too much? Yeah, but at least its tied to what he made off of their suffering.
Edit: For clarity, I will reiterate that what he did was horrible. I can’t even imagine the lengths I would have gone to had I been a similar victim.
1 Like
When I get to my office, I’ll pull up a link, but you can find an actual breakdown of how much was given to each family, based on individual situations and damages, and you can also find the formulas that were used to estimate damages/ how much Jones likely profited from the sandy hook stuff. It’s obviously imperfect, to say the least, to estimate something like this, but it was at least grounded in some facts.
Edit: added the breakdown of compensation by family.
2 Likes
Honestly, if I was one of the parents who lost a child and this piece of shit was calling me a crisis actor, paying a court settlement would be the least of his worries.
3 Likes
Those numbers are nuclear for sure. I can’t see them standing on appeal.
3 Likes
I don’t think they will either, but I think we still end up at a pretty devastating number for him, whatever that ends up being.
We still have the third case coming up, and from my understanding, punitive damages are allowed in that one (they weren’t in the first 2, I believe). And that case is understood to be the strongest of the 3.
Will be following.
1 Like
The states was already ridiculously litigious… these cases will hurt more than they will help i think.
1 Like
This is an interesting side conversation. Have you seen the photographs of that woman’s burns, read about the previous warnings that particular McDonalds had received for having insanely hot coffee, or seen the documentary about the case? It definitely not the frivolous suit that the media made it out to be.
But that doesn’t imply conspiracy.
But asking the questions about those inaccuracies suddenly makes it a conspiracy?
Again, this is why i disagree with your binary “is or isn’t” comment
The action of committing a conspiracy is an interesting and very arguable subject.
I had the privilege of watching my attorneys argue it against a DA once.
There has to be a meeting of the minds to take certain action to constitute a conspiracy. Just because a group or groups of people decide separately to take the same action does not a conspiracy make.
2 Likes
What’s the third option?
And was Jones asking questions or making claims?
Alex Jones is not but a trash Trumper that is not getting half of what he deserves. He is a con and the only truth he knows is his soon to be smaller bank account.