re: AP Admits Alex Jones Trial Was Just For ‘Show’ And Will Soon Be Thrown Out

quote:

---

as with everything you wrote about immunology

---

This is not the first time you have said this to to me so something I wrote must be sticking in your craw. I wish you would have brought up (maybe you did and I just missed it) because I do not remember writing a comment about immunology beyond well established basics.

quote:

---

This is not the first time you have said this to to me so something I wrote must be sticking in your craw. I wish you would have brought up (maybe you did and I just missed it) because I do not remember writing a comment about immunology beyond well established basics.

---

Nah, I just remember it was stupid, like pretty much everything people wrote about immunology.

quote:

---

Gumbopot and OML consistently post misleading or outright fake articles and try to pass them off as real. shite is hilarious.

---

Hey man, don't forget Strannix. He'd be insulted.

Confirmed troll. You knew it was inaccurate, but enjoy the attention from posting fake info. But also gets really mad at others posting fake info that goes against your preferred narrative. jjdoc jr

quote:

---

For clarification...Who again was "defamed"? And to what damaging degree? By what claim? (was the claim ever proven either way?)

---

1. Jones was sued by the families for defamation. These are the plaintiffs and they claimed they were defamed.
2. Jones did not answer the lawsuit, meaning he ignored it.
3. A default judgment was entered against him.
4. That means it was established without the need for proof that he did in fact defame the people as alleged by them.
5. The trial was to establish damages.
6. The jury awarded damages, meaning that they believed the plaintiffs were in fact damaged meaning yes, they proved damages.
7. The jury verdict was reduced to a judgment, that is collectible
8. Plaintiffs can now seek to collect on the judgment barring any suspensive type appeals

When I take my male enhancements I love to read infowars. I'm so manly now! Grrrr!

I get the impression some posters think Jones was defaulted as a result of some inadvertence (honest mistake) or his part or that of his attorneys. It was not,
As I understand it, Jones and his lawyers refused to answer and more tellingly, refused to answer discovery.
Seems to me that was a deliberate strategy and one which may have had some credible wisdom for a defendant who was going to get deserved, expensive justice from nearly any jury.
Discovery would have only underscored his callousness and maliciousness and revealed information about his sources, methods, and quackery that could have forever damaged him as a celebrity. He was in a no win situation he richly deserved.

quote:

---

Except you generally cannot discharge debts for intentional torts. And defamation is an intentional tort

---

Where is the defamation?

Did Jones accuse the parents or the kids of staging the shooting?

quote:

---

Except you generally cannot discharge debts for intentional torts. And defamation is an intentional tort. So there's that.

---

The problem with this is it was a default judgment after sanctions related to his non-cooperation with discovery. The Court chose the most serious sanctions by striking his pleadings and entering a default judgment. There was never findings made that his actions were willful and malicious after hearing any proof. That's going to be a problem in the COA as they don't like when cases aren't heard on the merits, and it's also going to create shades of grey whether the debts are dischargeable or not.