Alex Jones Trial

Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
533
Shown on Law&Crime Network YT channel. This should be way more interesting/entertaining than the Amber Heard/John Depp one and at the same time might reveal some yet unshown facts about Sandy Hook. He is being sued for $150000000...


 

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,698
Shown on Law&Crime Network YT channel. This should be way more interesting/entertaining than the Amber Heard/John Depp one and at the same time might reveal some yet unshown facts about Sandy Hook. He is being sued for $150000000...


Not a Jones fan at all, but it will be interesting to see how it goes.
 

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,698
Well, what a clown show on both sides. I haven't been watching but have seen short clips and a few reports. Apparently Jones got his lawyers from Barnum & Bailey, and the prosecutor is the most obnoxious person I've seen in awhile. It's like watching bad community theater actors. Now the Jan 6 committee is getting involved because 'Trump':


Jones finally concedes Sandy Hook was real:

"Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones says he now understands he was irresponsible to declare the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre a hoax, and he now believes it was “100% real.”

“Especially since I’ve met the parents. It’s 100% real,” Jones said before the jury began determining how much he and his media company, Free Speech Systems, owe for defaming Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis. Their son Jesse Lewis was among the 20 students and six educators who were killed in the attack in Newtown, Connecticut."


There's a lesson in here somewhere, like maybe don't publicly throw hoax claims around and slander people unless you have bullet-proof evidence and can back it up in court? Clearly Jones was full of crap.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,728
Revealing

It’s insane what theyre doing to him. The judge demanded evidence that doesn’t exist, and because he didn't turn it over, declared him guilty without a jury trial.
don't publicly throw hoax claims around and slander people unless you have bullet-proof evidence and can back it up in court? Clearly Jones was full of crap.
As if the veracity of that evidence would be weighed in court. Jones has been grovelling on every talk show that “it was real”, and they didn’t even give him a trial, just declared him guilty. And the trial wasn’t about whether or not it was real, just whether or not he can be said to have emotionally distressed those individuals, with damages of 150 million dollars.

by the way, sandy hook was a complete and utter hoax
 

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,698
It’s insane what theyre doing to him. The judge demanded evidence that doesn’t exist, and because he didn't turn it over, declared him guilty without a jury trial.

As if the veracity of that evidence would be weighed in court. Jones has been grovelling on every talk show that “it was real”, and they didn’t even give him a trial, just declared him guilty. And the trial wasn’t about whether or not it was real, just whether or not he can be said to have emotionally distressed those individuals, with damages of 150 million dollars.

by the way, sandy hook was a complete and utter hoax
I don't disagree that the judge is abhorrent, but the flip-side is that he caved because he could not back up his claims.

It's your right to believe it was a hoax and I'm not here to change your mind, but are you personally willing to confront those parents face to face and tell them they're all lying and their children were not murdered? If a parent brought a defamation case against you, can you personally present bullet-proof evidence of a hoax in court?

You may be right... but what if you're wrong? Now imagine what those parents have gone through losing their children in a horrific act of violence and then being accused publicly of it all being a hoax. I honestly can't imagine living through that kind of hell.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
533
Jones made a picture of the judge on fire and said on his show that she works with pedophiles lol. And its been shown in court. The guy is a savage and I agree this is a clown show..

 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,728
I don't disagree that the judge is abhorrent, but the flip-side is that he caved because he could not back up his claims.

It's your right to believe it was a hoax and I'm not here to change your mind, but are you personally willing to confront those parents face to face and tell them they're all lying and their children were not murdered? If a parent brought a defamation case against you, can you personally present bullet-proof evidence of a hoax in court?

You may be right... but what if you're wrong? Now imagine what those parents have gone through losing their children in a horrific act of violence and then being accused publicly of it all being a hoax. I honestly can't imagine living through that kind of hell.
Putting a haze of emotionality around the issue is just a screen to stop questioning it. How did the shooting happen at a school that was condemned 4 years previously?

here, watch the first 45 seconds of the press conference, and you can see yourself the “emotions” those “parents” were going through

also joneses claims were never in question. It’s not like he or anyone else gets a court case to debate the issue. According to him, he barely covered the case. He wasn’t spearheading the claim that it was a hoax. They really don’t have any evidence showing that, he covered it for like a day. It was other journalists that proved it was a hoax, he’s just the face the regime uses to squash the issue once and for all because he’s known as the conspiracy guy
 

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,698
Putting a haze of emotionality around the issue is just a screen to stop questioning it. How did the shooting happen at a school that was condemned 4 years previously?

here, watch the first 45 seconds of the press conference, and you can see yourself the “emotions” those “parents” were going through

also joneses claims were never in question. It’s not like he or anyone else gets a court case to debate the issue. According to him, he barely covered the case. He wasn’t spearheading the claim that it was a hoax. They really don’t have any evidence showing that, he covered it for like a day. It was other journalists that proved it was a hoax, he’s just the face the regime uses to squash the issue once and for all because he’s known as the conspiracy guy
You said SH is hoax. Fair enough, but you didn't answer my questions -
- Are you personally willing to confront those parents face to face and tell them they're all lying and their children were not murdered?
- If a parent brought a defamation case against you, can you present bullet-proof evidence of a hoax in court? Pointing to a second hand video of someone laughing isn't evidence that children did not die. What proof do you personally have?

That's all I'm asking.
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,728
Are you personally willing to confront those parents face to face and tell them they're all lying and their children were not murdered?
No? I’m not an asshole. That’s just not something I personally would do, hence I havent. What does that change?
If a parent brought a defamation case against you, can you present bullet-proof evidence of a hoax in court?
Sure, the school was condemned at the time. Pretty obvious right there. Really I haven’t researched this issue for about 7 years so can’t list all the facts to you but I remember that one. If you are interested watch the documentary I posted “we need to talk about sandy hook”
Pointing to a second hand video of someone laughing isn't evidence that children did not die.
thats not a second hand video, it’s a direct video on the day of, of one of the parents at a press conference laughing and joking around when he thought the cameras were off, and then clearly acting emotional for the cameras. What does this look like to you?
 

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,698
No? I’m not an asshole. That’s just not something I personally would do, hence I havent. What does that change?
The point is that it's really easy to sit from afar and make accusations when you're anonymous and there are no face to face consequences. I'm not saying questioning the narrative is bad. It's when the line is crossed over to 'SH is 100% a hoax' but no one is willing to stand behind it in real life that it falls apart.

Sure, the school was condemned at the time. Pretty obvious right there. Really I haven’t researched this issue for about 7 years so can’t list all the facts to you but I remember that one. If you are interested watch the documentary I posted “we need to talk about sandy hook”
Reality, though: If you're in court defending yourself against a defamation suit, what firsthand evidence of a hoax do you personally have to present? Conspiracy videos and someone else's documentary aren't going to cut it. Do you honestly not see that?

thats not a second hand video, it’s a direct video on the day of, of one of the parents at a press conference laughing and joking around when he thought the cameras were off, and then clearly acting emotional for the cameras. What does this look like to you?
I've seen it before. It's still a video that does not prove children did not die.

Here's where I stand: There are shady things about the incident, but no one has provided absolute concrete proof of a hoax that would stand up in any court. Better to err on the side of caution than potentially defame and slander people you don't even know. I'm all for discussing it and the inconsistencies, but because I wasn't there and have no clear evidence, there is no way I can flat-out condemn the whole thing as a hoax.
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,221
does anyone have the details of the jim fetzer or wolfgang halbig lawsuits?
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,728
The point is that it's really easy to sit from afar and make accusations when you're anonymous and there are no face to face consequences. I'm not saying questioning the narrative is bad. It's when the line is crossed over to 'SH is 100% a hoax' but no one is willing to stand behind it in real life that it falls apart.
Face to face consequences of questioning a regimes nefaious operations can be deadly. Sonny Bono died about a month after this speech in Congress, questioning one of the most aggregious acts by any regime for 100 years, the Waco massacre under the clintons
A regime can dole out strong consequences indeed. So what?
Reality, though: If you're in court defending yourself against a defamation suit, what firsthand evidence of a hoax do you personally have to present? Conspiracy videos and someone else's documentary aren't going to cut it. Do you honestly not see that?
I’d love to be able to dole out the facts to you but I researched this case 7 years ago, and I just don’t remember. I remember being convinced that it was shady af.
Again, a piece of evidence I remember is that the school was condemned, shut down, out of commission as of 2008. That one fact from my memory is enough to stand up in court I’d say.
Would you like me to put the time into putting together a list for you? Or are you trying to prove an auxiliary point?
I've seen it before. It's still a video that does not prove children did not die.
That wasn’t my question. What does that look like to you?
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,221
jones will of course lose this show trial, but it wont affect public opinion on the subject, nor will it stop the truth movement. people will still discuss all of the phony fake shootings despite their attempt to scare us into silence through defamation suits.

i came across this on IMDB:

anyone who has commented on this video has either given it a 1 star or 10 stars. completely polarized and dug in: one either knows its a hoax or does not.

demand is still up for jim fetzers nobody died at sandy hook:

btw, if anyone wants a link to a free e-copy of this book, send me a private message.
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,221
- If a parent brought a defamation case against you, can you present bullet-proof evidence of a hoax in court? Pointing to a second hand video of someone laughing isn't evidence that children did not die. What proof do you personally have?
good question, lurking.

no defendant would ever get a fair trial when it comes to a topic like this. IF they could, i think they could beat the case.
those children were sighted years afterward, alive. photos/videos of any of the children today along with current DNA sample(s) would go a long way in court, but i dont think it would be enough (nor would the FBI stats on the government website stating unquestionably that no one died that day). perhaps if the addresses of the children were obtained, they could be subpoenaed in court and then have their blood taken for a DNA sample in front of the judge.

if i was the defense, i would exhume the bodies in the graves and test the DNA in the graves (if there even is a body in there).
 

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,698
good question, lurking.

no defendant would ever get a fair trial when it comes to a topic like this.
When I say court of law, I'm assuming a fair court. Even with that, I don't think there is evidence to support a hoax, and you hit upon it below --

those children were sighted years afterward, alive. photos/videos of any of the children today along with current DNA sample(s) would go a long way in court, but i dont think it would be enough (nor would the FBI stats on the government website stating unquestionably that no one died that day). perhaps if the addresses of the children were obtained, they could be subpoenaed in court and then have their blood taken for a DNA sample in front of the judge.
Being sighted isn't enough, though. It would be easy for the SH side to claim mistaken identity. On the other side, it's easy for people to misidentify photos and videos. The proof would have to be physical and absolute, as you say.

if i was the defense, i would exhume the bodies in the graves and test the DNA in the graves (if there even is a body in there).
That would definitely seal it.
 
Last edited:

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,698
Face to face consequences of questioning a regimes nefaious operations can be deadly. Sonny Bono died about a month after this speech in Congress, questioning one of the most aggregious acts by any regime for 100 years, the Waco massacre under the clintons

I’d love to be able to dole out the facts to you but I researched this case 7 years ago, and I just don’t remember. I remember being convinced that it was shady af.
Again, a piece of evidence I remember is that the school was condemned, shut down, out of commission as of 2008. That one fact from my memory is enough to stand up in court I’d say.
Would you like me to put the time into putting together a list for you? Or are you trying to prove an auxiliary point?
But 'shady af' is still a mile away from 'case closed'. A massive hoax is also a massive crime. I've yet to see anyone brave enough or confident enough to take it to court and back up their claims. When that happens, I'll be watching.

That wasn’t my question. What does that look like to you?
My answer is the same: This video does not prove children did not die.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
533
jones will of course lose this show trial, but it wont affect public opinion on the subject, nor will it stop the truth movement. people will still discuss all of the phony fake shootings despite their attempt to scare us into silence through defamation suits.

i came across this on IMDB:

anyone who has commented on this video has either given it a 1 star or 10 stars. completely polarized and dug in: one either knows its a hoax or does not.

demand is still up for jim fetzers nobody died at sandy hook:

btw, if anyone wants a link to a free e-copy of this book, send me a private message.
He has already lost, his last trial was to declare him guilty and this one is to determine how much money he will have to pay. Possibly 150million. Ridiculous.

I dont know if he will go to jail if he cannot pay.

Anyway 26% of the american population believe the shooting was a hoax the prosecutor showed that statistic in his opening statement.
 
Top