It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A jury found Alex Jones guilty of defamation on Thursday after he claimed the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a hoax, making the podcaster pay over $4 million to the parents of a victim.
Jury Finds Alex Jones Guilty of Defamation in Sandy Hook Shooting Case, Orders Him to Pay $4 Million
The judge's ruling combines with three other prior decisions in Texas, granting a sweeping victory to the families of the shooting victims in the defamation cases against Jones, according to The New York Times.
As Insider previously reported, a Texas judge similarly issued default judgments in those cases after Jones and his lawyers also failed to comply with court orders to provide documents. The judge, in that case, said Jones showed "flagrant bad faith and callous disregard for the responsibilities of discovery under the rules."
Alex Jones found guilty in all 4 defamation cases the Sandy Hook families brought against him
Last year, Texas judge Guerra Gamble found Jones liable for damages in three defamation lawsuits, entering default judgments after Jones failed to give documents to the parents’ lawyers.
A Connecticut judge ruled he was guilty by default because he refused a court order to turn over documents.
In her ruling, Bellis criticized Jones’ attorney for providing only “sanitized, inaccurate” financial records and showed “callous disregard” for her repeated rulings to provide complete analytics data. She found Jones’ attorneys actions “were not just careful” but constituted “a pattern of obstructive conduct” requiring the most severe sanction of default, what she called a “last resort,” as reported by the Hartford Courant.
A default judgement means that the case will go directly to a jury to decide damages. Last month, a district court judge in Travis County, Texas also issued a default judgement against Jones for failing to comply with discovery requests in two defamation suits brought by the families of two Sandy Hook shooting victims.
A district court judge for Travis County, Texas issued a default judgment against Alex Jones for failing to comply with discovery requests in the defamation suits brought by two families in the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting. The shooting, which occurred on December 14, 2012, resulted in the deaths of 20 children and six adult school staff members.
Freedom of speech does not include the right:
To incite imminent lawless action.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
To make or distribute obscene materials.
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event. Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).
originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: chr0naut
Wouldn't you say banning books is wrong just as much those books that had outright malicious lies? and yet you still have many books today.
That have malicious lies and those books with certain topics arent yet banned...
but when it is malicious and is portrayed as truth
You can't say something evil
originally posted by: TheEndOfItAll
I am pretty sure that free speech is when you talk a bunch of crap and no one gets hurt. Correct me if I am wrong but Jones continued to spread BS even when his gullible idiot followers attacked and threatened the parents.
What Does Free Speech Mean?
Freedom of speech does not include the right:
To incite imminent lawless action.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
To make or distribute obscene materials.
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event. Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).
originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: chr0naut
I wasn't talking about fiction.
White House sidesteps question on Dr. Seuss after Biden erased him from Read Across America Day and instead calls it a day for celebrating 'diverse' authors
but when it is malicious and is portrayed as truth
Liberals and their personalities do it all the time and yet get away with it.
originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: chr0naut
You can't say something evil
The Liberals had being saying something evil for a decade. On twitter as well.
Their accounts haven't banned nor punished.
There are far leftist groups accounts for example are still running on twitter despite threats made against none Liberal people.