• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Alex Jones did WHAaaAAAaattT????

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,630
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
https://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Lawyers-Alex-Jones-sent-child-porn-to-Sandy-Hook-14005437.php

According to lawyers for the Sandy Hook families, Alex Jones sent them a whole bunch of electronic documents probably as ordered but the documents contained child porn.

Then, it comes out that this happens. Now already, this is enough to get conservatives and Libertarian conspiracy theorists to want to nominate him for some kind of political office...

but then he goes on his show and seems to threaten and/or offer up a reward for assassination:
Jones publicly responded on a broadcast of his show that he is being framed by Chris Mattei, the lawyer for the Sandy Hook families and went on making what Mattei and his law firm, Koskoff, Koskoff and Bieder claim are threats against them.

"You’re trying to set me up with child porn, I’ll get your ass," Jones states on the broadcast. "One million dollars, you little gang members. One million dollars to put your head on a pike." Jones then pounds a photograph of Mattei and goes into a rant at one point stating, "I’m gonna kill …"

I can see why youtube and twitter would want to ban this dindu nuffin thug, but I am more interested in hearing why conservatives and Libertarians are going to keep supporting forcing corporations in the free market to broadcast this guy's violence, fraud, and other illegal behaviors.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,594
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Jebus! Isn't that very illegal? Not the stuff alleged to be in the docs (which is obviously very illegal)... but did he just put out a contract and incite the murder of that guy?
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
“Mr. Jones was upset, he did not threaten Mr. Mattei,” (Jones' lawyer) said. “He spoke in a compassionate fashion.”
Right, right, right. I believe you. Sure.
I mean, I fully understand how the F-word is a friendly salutation in certain circles, and the C-word is often a male-bonding term. So, sure, saying you'd pay A MILLION DOLLARS to put someone's head on a pike, someone you're already in legal dispute with, that's compassionate.

It's like a Father's Day Card to someone who isn't your father.
Or, "Thinking of you...bleeding from a few major blood vessels."
Just like we used to chant at football games in high school "Die you Gravy-Sucking PIGS!" to hope 'may the best men win.'

Uh huh.
"
 

repoman

Contributor
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
8,275
Location
Seattle, WA
Basic Beliefs
Science Based Atheism
With the best interpretation of it, why did Alex Jones let his legal counsel mass dump all of the spam and malicious emails sent TO Infowars be sent out to the Sandy Hook families legal teams without sorting?

Was he being cheap, was he trying to swamp them with so much to sort?

I have never gotten any child porn let alone normal porn of any kind in my emails. What the hell is going on?

If Alex knew that people who hated him would stoop to the level of sending that stuff to him, why did he not sort out attachments sent in the email?

Probably a disgruntled former fan(s) of Jones who thought he was cucking to the real powers that be sent the child porn, they are probably the only people crazy enough to do that.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,630
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
With the best interpretation of it, why did Alex Jones let his legal counsel mass dump all of the spam and malicious emails sent TO Infowars be sent out to the Sandy Hook families legal teams without sorting?

Was he being cheap, was he trying to swamp them with so much to sort?

I have never gotten any child porn let alone normal porn of any kind in my emails. What the hell is going on?

If Alex knew that people who hated him would stoop to the level of sending that stuff to him, why did he not sort out attachments sent in the email?

Probably a disgruntled former fan(s) of Jones who thought he was cucking to the real powers that be sent the child porn, they are probably the only people crazy enough to do that.

Why are you presuming this stuff was sent from someone else, other than that this is what the right-wing blogosphere says?

Supposing that is true, I do not recall ever receiving such thing in spam either. If he visited such sites then that might happen, maybe, but they'd have to know his infowars email....which also is a presumption that we are talking infowars email and not personal email. I suppose he might want to use a non-personal email when doing things illegal in order to distance himself from the illegal actions, obfuscating his identity and making it harder to prove he was guilty in a court of law...

Can you point to reliable sources of information that your questions seem predicated upon?
 

scombrid

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2001
Messages
833
Location
Florida
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I am more interested in hearing why conservatives and Libertarians are going to keep supporting forcing corporations in the free market to broadcast this guy's violence, fraud, and other illegal behaviors.

Alex Jones and his little buddy grifter conman friend Mike Adams "The Health Ranger" of NaturalNews carry their base. GOP cultivated these guys in the Obama years when any anti-government conspiracy theory was a net benefit to Republicans that have been branding themselves as the party of individual liberty and the Democrats as the party of the New World Order and the "Deep State". As such they have not just tolerated but have helped to spread the crazy conspiracy theories espoused by Jones and his ilk. Now facebook and others are giving Jones and company the boot and the GOP is rallying to defense against this "censorship of conservative viewpoints". And I always say, "well I don't want the platform to dictate the content either but you consider Alex Jones and Mike Adams and similar to be "conservative viewpoints"? That is really sad if that is what conservatism has become. It really is though. Scroll through the social media feed of any rabid Trump supporter and you'll find links to Joe Mercola and his bullshit about vaccines, chemtrails, conspiracy theories about 5G, etc... This used to be the stuff of fringe pot head anti-establishment semi-anarchist lefties. Not anymore. It is the Trump base.

Back in 2009-2011 they were banging on about conspiracy theories that Obama was using the Department of Homeland Security to deliberately cause ammunition shortages (it was record sales to the public that was causing a shortage), FEMA coffins, birtherism, etc... The GOP fanned those flames but without their political candidates on the national scene directly espousing them. They wanted to maintain an air of sanity as long as the anti-government conspiracy theories were helping them at the polls and in their aim to dismantle EPA and such. Trump saw that door wide open. That's why he went on TV in 2011 and started beating the birther drum. He made himself into the image that the base wanted.
 

repoman

Contributor
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
8,275
Location
Seattle, WA
Basic Beliefs
Science Based Atheism
Who wouldn't know Infowars emails?

They are trying to get people strung along into their $cam$ and answering emails makes they audience feel part of the Infowar.
 

scombrid

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2001
Messages
833
Location
Florida
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Jones also said on his show

"I like women with big giant tits and big asses. I don't like kids like you goddamn rapists," Jones said. "I literally would never have sex with children, I don't like having sex with children, I would never have sex with children. I am not a Democrat. I am not a liberal. I do not cut children's genitals off like the left does."

Why wouldn't conservatives and conservolibertarians love the guy? That's the kind of garbage I read on their social media feeds every day except on social media there's usually some awesome memey graphics to go along with the text.

Until enough of the "good ones" stand up and repudiates this crap I will assume that it is their standard across the party.
 

scombrid

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2001
Messages
833
Location
Florida
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Who wouldn't know Infowars emails?

They are trying to get people strung along into their $cam$ and answering emails makes they audience feel part of the Infowar.

It is entirely plausible that people had sent the stuff to Infowars with malicious intend and the nasty stuff just sat in junk folders or got moved into 'deleted items' and ignored but never fully purged. Given his obsession with pedos I could see people sending him stuff like that. It is like 12 files out of >57,000? Yeah, his semi-competent lawyers were dumping crap on the prosecuting lawyers. The plaintiff lawyers want to read through email to find "knew or should have known" evidence regarding Jones' libel or slander against the victim families. Unless there's evidence that he or someone in his camp were actually trafficking in illegal porn then that is a nothingburger.

What is really damnable here is his affirmative claims against the opposing counsel and the threats. Then he does that bullshit walk back.

But really, I'm calling false flag on this one. Jones is probably trying to frame opposing counsel for the crime of trying to frame him. He planted the files with the intent to make it look like opposing counsel planted the files.
 

repoman

Contributor
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
8,275
Location
Seattle, WA
Basic Beliefs
Science Based Atheism
Who wouldn't know Infowars emails?

They are trying to get people strung along into their $cam$ and answering emails makes they audience feel part of the Infowar.

It is entirely plausible that people had sent the stuff to Infowars with malicious intend and the nasty stuff just sat in junk folders or got moved into 'deleted items' and ignored but never fully purged. Given his obsession with pedos I could see people sending him stuff like that. It is like 12 files out of >57,000? Yeah, his semi-competent lawyers were dumping crap on the prosecuting lawyers. The plaintiff lawyers want to read through email to find "knew or should have known" evidence regarding Jones' libel or slander against the victim families. Unless there's evidence that he or someone in his camp were actually trafficking in illegal porn then that is a nothingburger.

What is really damnable here is his affirmative claims against the opposing counsel and the threats. Then he does that bullshit walk back.

But really, I'm calling false flag on this one. Jones is probably trying to frame opposing counsel for the crime of trying to frame him. He planted the files with the intent to make it look like opposing counsel planted the files.

Oh, I think that I have a conspiracy that makes sense (meta joke) it is that is that he probably had loony audience members who found sketchy websites by accident and they sent samples and links and said "Alex, you have got to find a way to stop this!"

Also, if Alex or his staff knew that they got these emails either from well meaning loonies (contact them and tell them to delete files and contact police themselves) or malicious spam the right action would have been to contact police at the time.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,594
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
What is really damnable here is his affirmative claims against the opposing counsel and the threats. Then he does that bullshit walk back.
It obviously wasn't a legit threat because otherwise, he would have proposed payment in Bitcoin. ;)

But really, I'm calling false flag on this one. Jones is probably trying to frame opposing counsel for the crime of trying to frame him. He planted the files with the intent to make it look like opposing counsel planted the files.
Personally, I don't give too much care to the allegation of the origin of the files verses the rather crude and in your face death threat which shouldn't be too hard to demonstrate in court.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,067
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Jones also said on his show

"I like women with big giant tits and big asses. I don't like kids like you goddamn rapists," Jones said. "I literally would never have sex with children, I don't like having sex with children, I would never have sex with children. I am not a Democrat. I am not a liberal. I do not cut children's genitals off like the left does."

Why wouldn't conservatives and conservolibertarians love the guy? That's the kind of garbage I read on their social media feeds every day except on social media there's usually some awesome memey graphics to go along with the text.

Until enough of the "good ones" stand up and repudiates this crap I will assume that it is their standard across the party.

So is Jones the one that keeps spewing this gross misconception about transition therapy? I've seen it vomited repeatedly by blowhards on the right, and I know it must be originating somewhere for it to be churned out from the lie machine so often.
 

Gun Nut

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2018
Messages
2,746
Location
Colorado
Basic Beliefs
None
Who wouldn't know Infowars emails?

They are trying to get people strung along into their $cam$ and answering emails makes they audience feel part of the Infowar.

It is entirely plausible that people had sent the stuff to Infowars with malicious intend and the nasty stuff just sat in junk folders or got moved into 'deleted items' and ignored but never fully purged. Given his obsession with pedos I could see people sending him stuff like that. It is like 12 files out of >57,000? Yeah, his semi-competent lawyers were dumping crap on the prosecuting lawyers. The plaintiff lawyers want to read through email to find "knew or should have known" evidence regarding Jones' libel or slander against the victim families. Unless there's evidence that he or someone in his camp were actually trafficking in illegal porn then that is a nothingburger.

What is really damnable here is his affirmative claims against the opposing counsel and the threats. Then he does that bullshit walk back.

But really, I'm calling false flag on this one. Jones is probably trying to frame opposing counsel for the crime of trying to frame him. He planted the files with the intent to make it look like opposing counsel planted the files.

Well the law regarding child porn does not touch on what you may or may not know about having. The law is more about distributing... so if he received child porn, and then it was forwarded, he broke the law.

Or, do you think that "i didn't know she was underage" is an airtight defense? Hint: it's not... and neither is "I didn't know it was forwarded".
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,738
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
With the best interpretation of it, why did Alex Jones let his legal counsel mass dump all of the spam and malicious emails sent TO Infowars be sent out to the Sandy Hook families legal teams without sorting?

Was he being cheap, was he trying to swamp them with so much to sort?

I have never gotten any child porn let alone normal porn of any kind in my emails. What the hell is going on?

If Alex knew that people who hated him would stoop to the level of sending that stuff to him, why did he not sort out attachments sent in the email?

Probably a disgruntled former fan(s) of Jones who thought he was cucking to the real powers that be sent the child porn, they are probably the only people crazy enough to do that.

Sort out? He was probably ordered to turn over everything.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,738
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Well the law regarding child porn does not touch on what you may or may not know about having. The law is more about distributing... so if he received child porn, and then it was forwarded, he broke the law.

Or, do you think that "i didn't know she was underage" is an airtight defense? Hint: it's not... and neither is "I didn't know it was forwarded".

I disagree--he was legally compelled to do so and thus can't be punished for doing so. I wouldn't even automatically say it was wrong if it was forwarded internally--I would not be willing to convict someone for forwarding kiddie porn to their legal department and asking what to do about it. Or even to the IT department, "Can you do anything about this garbage I'm getting?"
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,630
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
Well the law regarding child porn does not touch on what you may or may not know about having. The law is more about distributing... so if he received child porn, and then it was forwarded, he broke the law.

Or, do you think that "i didn't know she was underage" is an airtight defense? Hint: it's not... and neither is "I didn't know it was forwarded".

I disagree--he was legally compelled to do so and thus can't be punished for doing so. I wouldn't even automatically say it was wrong if it was forwarded internally--I would not be willing to convict someone for forwarding kiddie porn to their legal department and asking what to do about it. Or even to the IT department, "Can you do anything about this garbage I'm getting?"

Do you actually know this is what happened?
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,829
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Well the law regarding child porn does not touch on what you may or may not know about having. The law is more about distributing... so if he received child porn, and then it was forwarded, he broke the law.

Or, do you think that "i didn't know she was underage" is an airtight defense? Hint: it's not... and neither is "I didn't know it was forwarded".

I disagree--he was legally compelled to do so and thus can't be punished for doing so. I wouldn't even automatically say it was wrong if it was forwarded internally--I would not be willing to convict someone for forwarding kiddie porn to their legal department and asking what to do about it. Or even to the IT department, "Can you do anything about this garbage I'm getting?"

So he was holding onto it and not reporting it? How is that not unlawful?
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,738
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Well the law regarding child porn does not touch on what you may or may not know about having. The law is more about distributing... so if he received child porn, and then it was forwarded, he broke the law.

Or, do you think that "i didn't know she was underage" is an airtight defense? Hint: it's not... and neither is "I didn't know it was forwarded".

I disagree--he was legally compelled to do so and thus can't be punished for doing so. I wouldn't even automatically say it was wrong if it was forwarded internally--I would not be willing to convict someone for forwarding kiddie porn to their legal department and asking what to do about it. Or even to the IT department, "Can you do anything about this garbage I'm getting?"

Do you actually know this is what happened?

I was suggesting an actual reality--delivering kiddie porn they had received as part of a discovery request is not illegal. I was discussing a couple of hypotheticals of situations I would accept the forwarding of it to others as not being a criminal act, also.

Furthermore, even if deleted it would likely persist on a backup tape. IT isn't going to be expected to go through and purge it from backup tapes. If such a backup gets delivered as a result of a discovery request you've got the legal transmission of kiddie porn.
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
Furthermore, even if deleted it would likely persist on a backup tape. IT isn't going to be expected to go through and purge it from backup tapes.
Really?
I admit, we never deal with kiddie porn at work, but when we get classified data accidentally emailed to our computers, IT goes intensely paranoid in dealing with every possible place it might be. If Sam recieves something from SP that they later decide was classified, they quarantine every computer he emailed anything to between receipt and identification, scrub any nemory device accessed during that time, including thumb drives, and print fifty pages of blanks out of any printer he used. Seems weird that the IT guys wouldn't thimk of t he backups.
 

James Brown

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Messages
3,572
Location
Texas
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic Atheist
That would make for some wicked malware. Affect an enemy's computer so that it contains kiddie porn but can't be easily found on the computer...but it gets attached to every outgoing e-mail.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,738
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Furthermore, even if deleted it would likely persist on a backup tape. IT isn't going to be expected to go through and purge it from backup tapes.
Really?
I admit, we never deal with kiddie porn at work, but when we get classified data accidentally emailed to our computers, IT goes intensely paranoid in dealing with every possible place it might be. If Sam recieves something from SP that they later decide was classified, they quarantine every computer he emailed anything to between receipt and identification, scrub any nemory device accessed during that time, including thumb drives, and print fifty pages of blanks out of any printer he used. Seems weird that the IT guys wouldn't thimk of t he backups.

It's not that they wouldn't think of them, it's that there's no reason to go to extremes to hunt down deleted kiddie porn. It's presence on a backup tape isn't going to do any harm.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
19,026
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Alex Jones is found liable over Sandy Hook hoax conspiracy : NPR
A Texas judge has found Infowars host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones liable for damages in three defamation lawsuits brought by the parents of two children killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre over his claims that the shooting was a hoax.

Judge Maya Guerra Gamble in Austin, home of Infowars, entered default judgments against Jones, Infowars and other defendants for what she called their "flagrant bad faith and callous disregard" of court orders to turn over documents to the parents' lawyers. The rulings were issued on Monday and released on Thursday.

The cases now head to trial for juries to determine the amount of damages Jones and the other defendants will have to pay the families.
It's like he did not show up in court and the court continued without him. One has to ask why he refused to submit the documents. Did he think that he could win by stonewalling the courts?
Bill Ogden, a Houston lawyer representing the four parents in the Texas cases, said Jones and Infowars have failed to turn over documents for the past few years. He added such default judgments are rare.

"My clients have and continue to endure Defendants' 5-year campaign of repulsive lies," Ogden said in a statement, which quoted the judge's ruling. "We believe the Court hit this nail on the head when it considered Alex Jones' and Infowars' 'bad faith approach to this litigation,' Mr. Jones' 'public threats,' and Jones' 'professed belief that these proceedings are show trials.'"
Those jury judgments may not be the end of this litigation, because AJ is likely to appeal them. But pissing off judges is not a good way to get good verdicts.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
19,026
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Alex Jones Liable in Sandy Hook Defamation Suits - The New York Times - "A Connecticut judge’s ruling combines with decisions in Texas to grant a clean sweep for families of shooting victims in their cases against the Infowars host."

"The judge in Connecticut ruled on Monday that because Mr. Jones refused to turn over documents ordered by the courts, including financial records, he was liable by default."
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,829
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,829
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Infowars host Alex Jones failed to show up and testify under oath at a deposition Wednesday in a lawsuit filed by relatives of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, leading the families' lawyer to call for Jones' arrest if he doesn't appear again Thursday.

Jones, whose attorney said he missed the deposition because of an appointment for undisclosed medical conditions, was scheduled to testify Wednesday and Thursday in Austin, Texas, where Infowars is based, in connection with the relatives’ defamation lawsuit against him for saying the 2012 school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, was a hoax.

Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis found Jones liable for damages in November. A trial on how much he should pay the families is set to begin in August.
Bellis on Wednesday ordered Jones to appear at the deposition Thursday and warned he would be in contempt of her order if he doesn't show. She denied a request by the families' lawyer, Christopher Mattei, to issue an arrest order to have Jones brought to the proceeding if he fails to attend again, but said Mattei could seek to subpoena Jones and request sanctions against him.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,738
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Funny how the ringleaders of the conspiracy theory that Democrats are running an underground child prostitution ring so often turn out to be... not unacquainted with the industry.
An awful lot of Republican accusations are simply projection.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,829
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Alex Jones, Who Said Sandy Hook Massacre Was a Hoax, Claims that Appearing for Deposition Would Cause Him ‘Significant Stress’
Alex Jones, the bombastic radio and online host who has already begun to face the legal consequences of insisting that the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax, says that he shouldn’t be held in contempt for failing—again and again—to appear for a deposition, citing unspecified medical concerns and saying it would cause him “significant stress.”

In a brief opposing a request that he be held in contempt, Jones, through his lawyer Norman Pattis, invoked the coronavirus pandemic in a line of reasoning that—in light of Jones’ own vocal opposition to the reality of COVID and the efficacy of the vaccines—is arguably more than a little ironic.

For the past year and a half, the world has given more deference to medical professionals than any time in human history. Even courts joined in granting this deference without question, and the world justified that deference as being necessary to protect human life and human health. Many of the recommendations made by doctors were precautionary, and they received the force of law in many instances.
Here, the Plaintiffs have blatantly asked the Court to substitute its judgment for that of Mr. Jones’ doctors. They have publicly made a pseudo-macho challenge as to Mr. Jones’ courage in the media that has sullied this litigation, publicly accusing him of cowardice for ultimately listening to his doctors[.]
Pattis claims that the Sandy Hook families’ attorney Chris Mattei, a former federal prosecutor, is holding Jones to a standard they would denounce from a jury pool. Jones has a contentious relationship with Mattei, whose photograph Jones punched during a broadcast of his show.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
7,951
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
He had some quack write him a phony excuse note for a court hearing last week.

The Judge said:
So, I would say that the movant's have submitted no credible evidence upon which the Court can properly enter an order postponing the deposition of Mr. Jones. I have to say, I have no idea as to whether the letter that I did review in-camera is genuine. Nor do I have any way of knowing whether the author of the letter is currently licensed. I have been called upon to review records for purposes - similar to this for purposes of trial continuance or deposition continuances related to either a party or a lawyer, countless times.

But I have never seen one as bare bones as this one. This one did not have any letterhead. It had no address on it. It just has no indication of whether the doctor is a sole practitioner. Whether he's in a group. It doesn't indicate what kind of doctor it is. There's absolutely no description of his practice. The Court has no information besides a name.

And there's been no evidence besides that in-camera letter. The letter fails to address the length of the patient/physician relationship. It does not say that the physician examined Jones or evaluated Jones. Nothing else was submitted along the lines of a bill or doctors notes. Any other evidence like that. And this is not actually a medical record, it is just this bare bones note. With respect to the reasonableness of the recommendation that Jones not attend his deposition, the only the restriction really is, is that he is remaining home and that he should not attend the deposition.

The letter doesn't address any other restrictions that one would expect to see, such as limitations or restrictions on his physical activity or physical exertion. Restrictions related to driving. Restrictions related to work or work related activities. And there is really absolutely no explanation at all as to why the recommendation that Mr. Jones remain at home. There's no basis for it, except saying, on my advice he is remaining home under my supervision.

And Jones happened to be broadcasting his show live while the hearing took place.

The Judge said:
And it appears to the Court unreasonable to suggest that Jones can broadcast live for hours. Whether it's from home remotely, or from the studio. But that he cannot sit for a deposition. And I say that because in connection with motions that were filed several years back in this matter, the Court was called upon to review portions of Jones' broadcast. And I would say that at least the portions of the broadcast that the Court was required to review in connection with the motions, the Jones demeanor during those broadcasts were anything but calm.

So it is not - the Court can't reconcile the nature of at least the broadcast the Court saw, along with a deposition. It just doesn't make sense to the Court that you can broadcast in such a manner, but you can't sit for a professional deposition with lawyers. And I again, leave to counsel to address the issue of the letter from this purported physician, which states, quote, on my advice he is remaining home under my supervision.

And counsel's argument that he can't attend the deposition because he needs to stay at home, and the suggestion from opposing counsel that Mr. Jones is broadcasting from his studio. And what appears to be agreement by everyone involved, that he has been broadcasting live today, including during the arguments that we've had.
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
He had some quack write him a phony excuse note for a court hearing last week.

The Judge said:
So, I would say that the movant's have submitted no credible evidence upon which the Court can properly enter an order postponing the deposition of Mr. Jones. I have to say, I have no idea as to whether the letter that I did review in-camera is genuine. Nor do I have any way of knowing whether the author of the letter is currently licensed. I have been called upon to review records for purposes - similar to this for purposes of trial continuance or deposition continuances related to either a party or a lawyer, countless times.

But I have never seen one as bare bones as this one. This one did not have any letterhead. It had no address on it. It just has no indication of whether the doctor is a sole practitioner. Whether he's in a group. It doesn't indicate what kind of doctor it is. There's absolutely no description of his practice. The Court has no information besides a name.

And there's been no evidence besides that in-camera letter. The letter fails to address the length of the patient/physician relationship. It does not say that the physician examined Jones or evaluated Jones. Nothing else was submitted along the lines of a bill or doctors notes. Any other evidence like that. And this is not actually a medical record, it is just this bare bones note. With respect to the reasonableness of the recommendation that Jones not attend his deposition, the only the restriction really is, is that he is remaining home and that he should not attend the deposition.

The letter doesn't address any other restrictions that one would expect to see, such as limitations or restrictions on his physical activity or physical exertion. Restrictions related to driving. Restrictions related to work or work related activities. And there is really absolutely no explanation at all as to why the recommendation that Mr. Jones remain at home. There's no basis for it, except saying, on my advice he is remaining home under my supervision.

And Jones happened to be broadcasting his show live while the hearing took place.

The Judge said:
And it appears to the Court unreasonable to suggest that Jones can broadcast live for hours. Whether it's from home remotely, or from the studio. But that he cannot sit for a deposition. And I say that because in connection with motions that were filed several years back in this matter, the Court was called upon to review portions of Jones' broadcast. And I would say that at least the portions of the broadcast that the Court was required to review in connection with the motions, the Jones demeanor during those broadcasts were anything but calm.

So it is not - the Court can't reconcile the nature of at least the broadcast the Court saw, along with a deposition. It just doesn't make sense to the Court that you can broadcast in such a manner, but you can't sit for a professional deposition with lawyers. And I again, leave to counsel to address the issue of the letter from this purported physician, which states, quote, on my advice he is remaining home under my supervision.

And counsel's argument that he can't attend the deposition because he needs to stay at home, and the suggestion from opposing counsel that Mr. Jones is broadcasting from his studio. And what appears to be agreement by everyone involved, that he has been broadcasting live today, including during the arguments that we've had.
It reads like when your 7-year-old lies to you. Part of you wants to sit down with him and list "These are all the ways i know you're lying.
"'Cause, you know, i would rather you didn't lie, but good Bast, please at least do me the honor of doing it competently!"
 

bleubird

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
1,323
Location
Alaska
Basic Beliefs
none
I bet he get well real soon.
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
I bet he get well real soon.
Esp. since the families turne down his settlement offer. They want him to pay, as in 'nailed to the wall.'
I hope the deposition turns up on Netflix.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,829
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Jones: “We got this judge up in Connecticut, if you could call it that — this thing that has just cheated us every way, lied about us, said we didn’t give them this, sanctioned us"
So you know what? I’m going to go up there so they can clap their irons on me, whatever, because at least I’m a grown man, I know God. I’m not like some kid in these leftist dungeons they’re raping. People got God to deal with, that’s all I can tell you. Oh, I’m not saying this judge or any of these lawyers are pedophiles. I’m just saying the news and the left promotes pedophilia while attacking the family, and the Democratic Party itself just signed an executive order that will destroy women’s sports. That’s what I said.
Ain't no rape like leftist dungeon rape.
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
, and the Democratic Party itself just signed an executive order that will destroy women’s sports.
The PARTY? Because you cannot say The (Duly Elected) President.
Jeez. Okay, so, let's do away with gendered sports. Graduated levels by ability, similar to wright classes.... done!

Ain't no rape like leftist dungeon rape.
Trying to imagine a leftist dungeon.
No one's in chains. Or everyone is, including the jailers.
Well-illuminated, good air circulation, skylights, drainage (much better than a Deployed sub!).
Pests, but only endangered species of insects and rodents.
The dripping water sound is recorded, all pipes are up to code.
No more than 4 hours of rape per week, and all holidays observed, even if no one currently in the dungeon celebrates it.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,829
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Companies owned by far-right radio host Alex Jones filed for bankruptcy after being hit by a flurry of lawsuits.


Three entities, including his website Infowars, sought Chapter 11 protection in Southern Texas, each with estimated liabilities of as much as $10 million, according to court filings. Chapter 11 filings allow a business to keep operating while working on a turnaround plan, and pause pending civil litigation.

Jones and his companies last year were found liable in a defamation lawsuit brought by relatives of children killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook school massacre after Jones called the shootings a hoax. A trial in Connecticut to determine the size of the damages has yet to take place. He was also found liable in similar proceedings in Texas.
:dancing:
 

Gospel

Warning Level 9999
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
2,905
Location
Florida
Gender
Masculine
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic
Is this a PG&E Chapter 11 or a Trump Chapter 11?
 
Top Bottom