Judge Napolitano on Free Speech and the Alex Jones case

[notmyfault2020]

Yes, that's the basis of libel and slander.

For instance, let's say you lie about me and say that I raped my children or some kind of bad shit like that. As a result, I lost my job or was not hired because of what you said about me. If what you said was a lie, I can go after you for the money I lost because of the lies you told.

But if you lie about me, saying something and I can't prove to a judge that you have cost me money, I'm not owed money.

Court is about making you whole again, not ringing up the $$$ register.

well, I would think there would be other damages.. like, say, someone accused one of the victims of making the Attack up so as to get attention.. That person did not lose money but lost respect in his or her neighborhood..

that's notdamage?

 

[TheGreatSatan]

You have a free speech right to yell "fire" in a theater. You will be held accountable if you yell "fire" and people are harmed. The judge should understand this.

If I called you a groomercrat, can you now turn around and sue me because I hurt your feelings?

 

[airplanemechanic]

well, I would think there would be other damages.. like, say, someone accused one of the victims of making the Attack up so as to get attention.. That person did not lose money but lost respect in his or her neighborhood..

that's notdamage?

There is no monetary value of "respect" so how do you prove you lost "respect" and how do you prove you lost money because of it?

In court, the burden is on YOU to prove your case. What are you going to do? Bring in people to testify that they don't respect you anymore ?

 

[White 6]

So if lying for fun and profit is a crime, can we do this to everyone we choose to paint with a broad brush?

Or just those you hate?

Using justice as an emotional tool eventually backfires further into regression as we now pick and choose what a lie is base on how we feel.

He was not charged criminally. There will be no jail time. This was just a damage suit, not brought by the government. Not a 1st amendment issue and the first amendment just protects you from government action, but does not give you the right to lie about individuals, bringing them to harm. That will get you sued and you will lose, just like Alex.

 

[iceberg]

He was not charged criminally. There will be no jail time. This was just a damage suit, not brought by the government. Not a 1st amendment issue and the first amendment just protects you from government action, but does not give you the right to lie about individuals, bringing them to harm. That will get you sued and you will lose, just like Alex.

So everyone lying about another should be sued in accordance to harm caused?

Bet I can make you change your mind in one word.

Russia.

 

[notmyfault2020]

There is no monetary value of "respect" so how do you prove you lost "respect" and how do you prove you lost money because of it?

In court, the burden is on YOU to prove your case. What are you going to do? Bring in people to testify that they don't respect you anymore ?

LOL

Well, if I hear from an actual attorney that thereis only consideration in court for $$ damages, I will "rest my [his/her] case" as it were.

 

[airplanemechanic]

He was not charged criminally. There will be no jail time. This was just a damage suit, not brought by the government. Not a 1st amendment issue and the first amendment just protects you from government action, but does not give you the right to lie about individuals, bringing them to harm. That will get you sued and you will lose, just like Alex.

Wrong. It is 100% a first amendment issue. He was in his own home (or business) using his own microphone on his own show. He was full of crap and is annoying as all hell but he has a right to do that.

 

[shockedcanadian]

https://www.newsmax.com/judgeandrewpnapolitano/alex-jones-freedom-of-speech-first-amendment/2022/10/21/id/1092838/

I was never a big fan of Alex Jones (though had not been following him last several years so don't really know much about the Alex Jones of 2022)

But he had a right to say and i totally DO concur with this, that the gummit cannot be trusted. Boy, do I agree with that one! And I have a million reasons to do so..

Judge N mentions the Brandenberg case, which I am somewhat familiar with. Brandenberg had a KKK rally, if I recall correctly, and people in his town wanted it stopped. But free speech was invoked and B won.

So why didn't Alex Jones win?

To me the danger isn't in Jones speech it is in those who believe such conspiracy B.S. It's a slippery slope, but people have a right to be stupid and listen to him, even take him seriously.

There are MANY people who mock religion. We allow it to be freely spread, the belief that a man is in the skies, overseeing us all, knowing all etc. Are people sued for promoting religion without any science or tangible, testable evidence to back it?

It's called faith, and some of other faiths are even offended when they hear another opinion different from theirs. For all the scumbag that Alex is, and the fools that believe him, at what point is his right to freedom of opinion and speech violated?

The courts have to do a job, but the amount of the decision to me is absurd and essentially ruins any credibility IMO He didn't wrongfully throw people in prison for decades or interfere in peoples lives, he wrongfully spread absurd and offensive theories, as disgusting as it was.

Maybe libel and slander make sense, but for 100s of millions? This isn't proportional.

 

[airplanemechanic]

LOL

Well, if I hear from an actual attorney that thereis only consideration in court for $$ damages, I will "rest my [his/her] case" as it were.

That's all a court can reward, is money. You have to prove damages in order to get them.

Look, I was shot 6 times in an armed robbery at work. My lawyers have to prove that I have been harmed permanently by the damage done by the bullets. They had to get access to the hospital reports, medical records, everything, JUST TO PROVE that I was harmed or order to get a dollar out of anyone. They even had to subpoena the clinical records from my PTSD trauma therapist in order to prove I had PTSD, a CLINICAL DIAGNOSES by a licensed psychologist. I couldn't just walk in and say "Man, yea I got dat PTSD" and expect the money to come rolling in.

So if you think courts will reward money to someone who says "But he upset me" you've got a long row to hoe.

 

[Marener]

But with libel, you have to show damages. In order to be rewarded money, you must show you lost money.

Not a single person in this trial was able to demonstrate how AJ cost them a penny.

It was all a sham and a joke.

I hate that he did that, but he had the right to do it and I believe he will win on appeal. It wouldn't shock me, with a settlement of almost a billion dollars, that this winds up in the lap of SCOTUS.

None of you said a word when Peter Thiel used Hulk Hogan to sue and destroy Gawker.

These families were tortured by the actions of Jones’s followers. Nothing really happened to Hulk Hogan.

 

[White 6]

So everyone lying about another should be sued in accordance to harm caused?

Bet I can make you change your mind in one word.

Russia.

Should be sued or could be sued? I'm not into frivolous lawsuits, personally. This one was not frivolous and Alex just lost because he was wrong to do what he did.
Hey, you aren't making the point that right-wing lawyer like Alex uses or Trump uses are just generally shitty lawyers are. Well, his lawyer did send the plaintiff lawyer Alex's complete phone text messages and history, so there is that. Moral: Don't use shitty right-wing lawyers if you are guilty of committing some act, or libel, slander etc. They are only of use outside the courtroom where they do not have to know or support the law.

 

[pknopp]

Can't be prosecuted for yelling "fire" even if there isn't one.

You need to stop using that analogy. It was used one time in an explanation of a ruling by SCOTUS that has since been overturned over 40 years ago. This statement WAS NEVER BINDING LAW.

YES, you CAN yell "fire" in a theatre.

It’s Time to Stop Using the ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater’ Quote

Oliver Wendell Holmes made the analogy during a controversial Supreme Court case that was overturned more than 40 years ago.

www.theatlantic.com

"But those who quote Holmes might want to actually read the case where the phrase originated before using it as their main defense. If they did, they'd realize it was never binding law, and the underlying case, U.S. v. Schenck, is not only one of the most odious free speech decisions in the Court's history, but was overturned over 40 years ago."



Wrong. See above.

I argued you could........until someone gets hurt. Address my actual argument.

 

[notmyfault2020]

To me the danger isn't in Jones speech it is in those who believe such conspiracy B.S. It's a slippery slope, but people have a right to be stupid and listen to him, even take him seriously.

There are MANY people who mock religion. We allow it to be freely spread, the belief that a man is in the skies, overseeing us all, knowing all etc. Are people sued for promoting religion without any science or tangible, testable evidence to back it?

It's called faith, and some of other faiths are even offended when they hear another opinion different from theirs. For all the scumbag that Alex is, and the fools that believe him, at what point is his right to freedom of opinion and speech violated?

The courts have to do a job, but the amount of the decision to me is absurd and essentially ruins any credibility IMO He didn't wrongfully throw people in prison for decades or interfere in peoples lives, he wrongfully spread absurd and offensive theories, as disgusting as it was.

Maybe libel and slander make sense, but for 100s of millions? This isn't proportional.

I totally agree and thanks for bringing up the truth about religion and how one can never absolutely prove (to anyone listening) that God exists or that He is.. as is said in the Bible.

I wish I knew more about this case. I am wondering exactly what Jones said that brought on a lawsuit. Why did the lawyer takethe case? we know lawyers aren't going 2 take a case unless it looks like a winnable case. So I guess I will Search on this (if I find time.. very busy lately).

Based on what I know so far, he got a very raw deal. And this kind of thing just encourages others to bring such BS suits.. See someone with money? Grab some for yourself!

 

[White 6]

Wrong. It is 100% a first amendment issue. He was in his own home (or business) using his own microphone on his own show. He was full of crap and is annoying as all hell but he has a right to do that.

File an Amicus brief if there is an appeal. This one has been decided.

 

[Sixties Fan]

[Here is why Alex Jones was sued. He made up stories about the children not being dead. His followers believed him and harassed the parents for years. He made a ton of money off of those lies. He refused to back down, and was forced to do so during trial, if I recall]


Sept. 28, 2022, 4:46 p.m. ETSept. 28, 2022
Elizabeth Williamson
Reporting from the courtroom
The jury is viewing Jones’ deposition, in which he acknowledges that Robbie Parker did not say “read the card?” but rather was asking, “Start?” Jones acknowledges he got it wrong. In front of the courthouse last week, Jones said Infowars is right “95 percent of the time."

Sept. 28, 2022, 4:41 p.m. ETSept. 28, 2022
Elizabeth Williamson
Reporting from the courtroom
While Robbie and Alissa Parker prepared to fly to Utah for Emilie’s burial, Jones aired another broadcast, in which he said, “They’re staging it. That’s what my gut tells me. It’s never been wrong.” On the day of her funeral, Jones mentioned Robbie Parker by name for the first time, falsely claiming that Robbie Parker had said “read the card?” as in cue cards, when he stepped to the lectern.

Sept. 28, 2022, 4:37 p.m. ETSept. 28, 2022
Elizabeth Williamson
Reporting from the courtroom
Robbie Parker is recalling that the morning after that news conference, two days after Emilie’s death, he went to the memorial Facebook page his friends had created, something that “kept me stable.” But he “started to see these comments: ‘liar,’ and ‘why were you laughing.’”

Much of the testimony in the damages trial against Alex Jones has focused on the emotional anguish suffered by plaintiffs who were defamed by him after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012. But the other central matter in the Connecticut trial is how much money the Infowars host made off those lies.

Mr. Jones has downplayed his profits, saying the cases against him have forced him to place Free Speech Systems, Infowars’ parent company, into bankruptcy. But attorneys for the families of Sandy Hook victims say he made millions off his baseless claims.
-----------
WATERBURY, Conn. — There is no more direct link in this trial between Alex Jones’s lies about the Sandy Hook shooting and the suffering of a plaintiff than the story of Robbie Parker, whose daughter Emilie died in the massacre and who came to the witness stand after his wife, Alissa Parker.

Lawyers for the families have several times played for the jury a recording of the news conference Mr. Parker gave the night after the shooting — an event Mr. Jones mocked for years on Infowars, calling Mr. Parker a “soap opera actor,” questioning his identity, his demeanor and his loss.


(full article online)

Alex Jones Damages Trial: Alex Jones Damages Trial: Parents Describe Years of Abuse (Published 2022)

Alissa and Robbie Parker, whose daughter Emilie died in the Sandy Hook school shooting, were harassed for years after Mr. Jones promoted conspiracy theories declaring the massacre a hoax.

www.nytimes.com

 

[iceberg]

Should be sued or could be sued? I'm not into frivolous lawsuits, personally. This one was not frivolous and Alex just lost because he was wrong to do what he did.
Hey, you aren't making the point that right-wing lawyer like Alex uses or Trump uses are just generally shitty lawyers are. Well, his lawyer did send the plaintiff lawyer Alex's complete phone text messages and history, so there is that. Moral: Don't use shitty right-wing lawyers if you are guilty of committing some act, or libel, slander etc. They are only of use outside the courtroom where they do not have to know or support the law.

You are not understanding my point in I don't care about emotional right vs left.

If you set the standard that you can sue because of a lie, then ALL need to follow that standard.

Now you backtrack and try to niche the argument into what you are emotionally invested in, as illustrated by your emotional terminology.

I only ask that WHATEVER the laws/rules are that they apply to all.

You seem to have a problem with that and go off making this judgment situational to your favor.

Hey, if this is the law, fry Jones. I'm not defending him. I'm simply saying use this standard for all.

You start beeping like crazy when you back up like you just did.

Justice needs to be blind or it's not justice but revenge.

 

[notmyfault2020]

Wrong. It is 100% a first amendment issue. He was in his own home (or business) using his own microphone on his own show. He was full of crap and is annoying as all hell but he has a right to do that.

I don't think he is as full of it as you may think.. but again, I have not been following Jones for years.. He is right, for example, to warn people not to trust gummit

 

[pknopp]

He spreads conspiracy theories because that's what he does....

He lied. He admitted he knew he was lying.

Conspiracy theories are things not provable either way. They could be a long stretch but they are not known lies.

Claiming he did it to harm people on purpose is ludicrous....Though you do have a corner on ludicrous today, so there's that.

Speaking a day after the parents of a 6-year-old boy who was killed in the 2012 attack testified about the suffering, death threats and harassment they've endured because of what Jones has trumpeted on his media platforms,

Alex Jones concedes that the Sandy Hook attack was '100% real'

 

[pknopp]

so l

so list his lies

He admitted them in court.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Conspiracy theorist and media personality Alex Jones was confronted with several pieces of evidence Wednesday that contradicted his own testimony during his defamation trial, where the parents of a 6-year-old killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary shooting are suing him after he claimed the massacre was staged.

The revelations — including text messages and emails Jones’ attorneys apparently sent to opposing counsel by accident — came on the final day of testimony in the portion of the trial in which jurors will determine what damages, if any, Jones owes the parents of Jesse Lewis.

Jones testified Tuesday that he never mentioned Sandy Hook in text messages, so he never provided such records as required during the trial’s discovery process. But Mark Bankston, an attorney for Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, told Jones on Wednesday that Jones’ own attorneys recently accidentally sent them the contents of Jones’ phone from the last two years.


Bankston then pointed out several texts and other evidence that contradicted Jones’ previous testimony and said he had several of Jones’ text messages that mentioned Sandy Hook. He had Jones read one to confirm.

At first, Jones tried to say that the existence of the texts demonstrated he properly provided them, even though his lawyers sent them after discovery.

“I’m not a tech guy. I told you in my testimony, I gave my phone to the lawyers,” Jones said.

Heslin and Lewis are suing Jones for $150 million for telling listeners of his Austin-based website and broadcast Infowars that the nation’s second deadliest school shooting — in which 20 children ages 6 and 7 and six adults were killed — was a government hoax meant to take away Americans’ guns. That led his listeners to harass the victims’ families.

(full article online)

Lawyers for Alex Jones turned over evidence that contradicted his testimony

After years of telling his followers the Sandy Hook school shooting was staged, Jones admitted on the stand that the massacre was real. He is being sued in Austin by parents of one of the shooting’s victims.

www.texastribune.org