Judge Napolitano on Free Speech and the Alex Jones case

[Winston]

show me in the law or statutes where that is illegal?

so far, I have NO evidence he did anything illegal. Smehow I doubt any will be given me.. since none has yet

Sec. 53a-302. Criminal misrepresentation: Class C felony. (a) A person is guilty of criminal misrepresentation when such person, with intent to intimidate or coerce the civilian population or a unit of government and with respect to any criminal matter under investigation by an agency or official of the state or any political subdivision of the state, knowingly and wilfully (1) falsifies, conceals or covers up a material fact by any trick, scheme or device, (2) makes any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation, or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, and such act materially impairs such investigation

https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_952.htm#sec_53a-302

 

[pknopp]

What jones said was stupid

I never believed it for an instant

Did you?

It's not about me or you is it? It's also not what I asked.

 

[pknopp]

I did, nowhere does it say fire in a theatre is illegal.

Thanks for playing.

Even brandenburg vs Ohio said you can ONLY be prosecuted if you cause an "imminent unlawful action" ie. a RIOT. Causing people to leave a theatre thinking its on fire is not unlawful or a riot.

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 - Supreme Court 1969 - Google Scholar

scholar.google.com

The lawyer notes that can indeed be actionable as you have harmed the theater owner.

 

[notmyfault2020]

Sec. 53a-302. Criminal misrepresentation: Class C felony. (a) A person is guilty of criminal misrepresentation when such person, with intent to intimidate or coerce the civilian population or a unit of government and with respect to any criminal matter under investigation by an agency or official of the state or any political subdivision of the state, knowingly and wilfully (1) falsifies, conceals or covers up a material fact by any trick, scheme or device, (2) makes any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation, or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, and such act materially impairs such investigation

https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_952.htm#sec_53a-302

Like I said

Show me where Jones did anything illegal. This statute does not apply

sheez

 

[airplanemechanic]

Sec. 53a-302. Criminal misrepresentation: Class C felony. (a) A person is guilty of criminal misrepresentation when such person, with intent to intimidate or coerce the civilian population or a unit of government and with respect to any criminal matter under investigation by an agency or official of the state or any political subdivision of the state, knowingly and wilfully (1) falsifies, conceals or covers up a material fact by any trick, scheme or device, (2) makes any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation, or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, and such act materially impairs such investigation

https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_952.htm#sec_53a-302

Then why wasn't he charged with that? Because that's not what he did. He didn't use any "trick, scheme or device." He state his OPINION. This law does not apply, sorry.

Copy and paste from a website does not a crime equal.

 

[Foxfyre]

What jones said was stupid

I never believed it for an instant

Did you?

Of course it was stupid. Unnecessary. Irrational. Even hurtful once evil people made sure those parents knew about it.

But illegal? No. And any court that would assign damages because feelings are hurt has gone way way over the top.

 

[pknopp]

Of course it was stupid. Unnecessary. Irrational. Even hurtful once evil people made sure those parents knew about it.

But illegal? No. And any court that would assign damages because feelings are hurt has gone way way over the top.

That isn't why there were damages.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The lawyer notes that can indeed be actionable as you have harmed the theater owner.

He would have to prove that, AND it would die a quick death because of free speech. All he could do is trespass that individual. Just like if I go to Wal Mart and tell all the customers how badly Wal Mart treats their employees and the customers leave. Wal Mart can't sue me for that. I'm stating my opinion. They can trespass me from their stores, but can't sue me.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Mac-7]

It's not about me or you is it? It's also not what I asked.

You work your side of the fence and I’ll work mine

Jones merely stated an opinion that libs didnt like and they want to silence him for it

Which I call unAmerican

 

[Foxfyre]

I did, nowhere does it say fire in a theatre is illegal.

Thanks for playing.

Even brandenburg vs Ohio said you can ONLY be prosecuted if you cause an "imminent unlawful action" ie. a RIOT. Causing people to leave a theatre thinking its on fire is not unlawful or a riot.

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 - Supreme Court 1969 - Google Scholar

scholar.google.com

If there IS a fire or you have reasonable reason to believe there is a fire, it is perfectly legal to inform people present and the proper thing would be to tell them not to panic but to safely leave in an orderly manner and point to all the regular and emergency exits.

If there is no fire and maliciously shouting fire to create a panic for fun or any other purpose is very wrong. And if anyone is hurt because of it, civil or criminal action could be appropriate.

Expressing your opinion as to whether there was or was not a fire or whether or not anyone was hurt in the theater after the fact, no matter how wrong or stupid, is not illegal. Or shouldn't be.

 

[pknopp]

He would have to prove that,

Which has been done multiple times in a court of law concerning Jones. Multiple times.

 

[Mac-7]

Of course it was stupid. Unnecessary. Irrational. Even hurtful once evil people made sure those parents knew about it.

But illegal? No. And any court that would assign damages because feelings are hurt has gone way way over the top.

Libs act as if only they can see the truth

While thinking they have to protect the rest of us from ourselves

 

[airplanemechanic]

If there IS a fire it is perfectly legal to inform people present and the proper thing would be to tell them not to panic but to safely leave.

If there is no fire and maliciously shouting fire to create a panic is very wrong. And if anyone is hurt because of it, civil or criminal action could be appropriate.

Expressing your opinion as to whether there was or was not a fire or whether or not anyone was hurt in the theater after the fact, no matter how wrong or stupid, is not illegal. Or shouldn't be.

Wrong. It has been explained ad nauseum in this thread that yelling fire in a theatre is totally legal and is protected speech. The old "fire in a theatre" thing is from 100 years ago, has since been overturned and debunked.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Which has been done multiple times in a court of law concerning Jones. Multiple times.

Yea, and you left out the part where I said it would die a slow death because he stated his OPINION.

 

[pknopp]

Yea, and you left out the part where I said it would die a slow death because he stated his OPINION.

If anything the court cases finding him liable will only continue to grow.

 

[airplanemechanic]

If anything the court cases finding him liable will only continue to grow.

Call me back after his appeal.

 

[Foxfyre]

That isn't why there were damages.

He wasn't found guilty of damages. He was found guilty for refusing to turn over documents.

So enlighten me.

Did the Sandy Hook parents suffer physical harm because of Alex Jones opinion?
Were they bullied?
Was their person, property, livelihood harmed or threatened?
Were they hindered in any way from life, liberty, pursuit of happiness?

I don't condone Alex Jones' conspiracy theories in the matter, but since there were no damages, the court never should have allowed the case to proceed period.

 

[pknopp]

He wasn't found guilty of damages. He was found guilty for refusing to turn over documents.

Wrong.

 

[Winston]

Then why wasn't he charged with that? Because that's not what he did. He didn't use any "trick, scheme or device." He state his OPINION. This law does not apply, sorry.

Copy and paste from a website does not a crime equal.

Quit trying to cover a lie with an opinion mask. Jones knew what he said wasn't true, he admitted that during a previous trial.

Alex Jones admits Sandy Hook attack was ’100% real,’ is caught in another lie thanks to his lawyers

So you can't claim an untruth, that you know is untrue, is merely an "opinion". It's ridiculous.

I heard a good interview with a former member of the Inforwars staff. It was about the Muslim community Islamberg in New York state. Jones had sent the team up there to investigate claims of terrorist activities. When the crew got there they interviewed dozens of people, found the community to be quiet, no signs of terrorist activity, and reported back to Jones. Well, those "facts" didn't fit the narrative and Jones rolls with those same terrorist claims.



That is just one incident of the blow back Jones initiated. I mean the man is a menace to society. He needs to be found a home at a Supermax facility. He don't give two shits if the lies he perpetuates spurs someone to attempt to blow up a mosque, initiate a mass shooting, harass parent's that have lost a child, as long as some of them send him some Benjamins. Karma dictates that at some point, someone, is going to put his ass down. Live by the sword, die by the sword kind of thing.

 

[Winston]

Did the Sandy Hook parents suffer physical harm because of Alex Jones opinion?
Were they bullied?
Was their person, property, livelihood harmed or threatened?
Were they hindered in any way from life, liberty, pursuit of happiness?

Yes
Yes
Yes
and Yes. Any more questions?