Posted on 07/21/2022 7:54:04 AM PDT by Red Badger
Maybe you can post the video of Jones saying Sandy Hook never happened, or was a fake. That claim keeps coming up, but there is not video of it. I find that rather odd.
All I have ever seen is discussions about odd things, like a parent laughing before he steps up to the microphone. And I also saw discussions with someone who claimed some of the people in the crowd were at other mass shooting events. Maybe they were or weren’t, but he anomalies and oddities cannot even be discussed?
That is where the 1st amendment comes in and yes, it is part of the trial. The trial that *never happened* because the democrat judges demanded he produce something that does not exist.
Jones defaulted because the court found discovery violations.
He’s already been “found guilty” in that sense. This idiotic blog author doesn’t have a clue about what happened and why and is beating the drum of stupid for the trailer park idiots.
Post 37. They provided 100% of their financials. The judge wants a breakdown that simply does not exist.
It’s all unconstitutional.
They cannot technically order him to do that, although we all know what the left thinks of the Constitution.
Baloney. As context for what I have to say, my comments are not idle, as if coming from one who's not researched the event. I've studied the evidence from the event more than 99% of the populace have. Yet, what I say is not to affirm Jones' guilt or an attempt to exonerate him.
I'm far more interested in the facts of the event than pretending Jones' involvement and what the jury said about what he did have necessarily determined the facts of the case itself. In like fashion, I feel no obligation to believe what DC judges or juries attempting to determine guilt or innocence of J6 defendants have said. I see the farce of their undue punishment, lies and show trials.
You written justification for violence, real, imputed and ascribed to parents in this case is abhorrent. I will respond no further to the likes of you!
Enjoy it down the whack-a-doodle rabbit hole!
Tremendous post!
Bingo. Yet those facts won’t stop the trailer park residents from engaging in their normal stupidity and crying about conspiracies that don’t exist.
That, and other facts, are for the court.
Are the anomalies and oddities related to the facts?
But I expect the whack jobs will blame the judges, as they always do (on both sides of the political spectrum) when they don’t get the decision they want.
Violence would be absolutely justified, even if not legal, if someone casted aspersions on me if my kid were killed.
I have no interest to a response from an evil, deluded nutter such as yourself; your definition or ‘research’ is looking for confirmatory evidence on Youtube. But then you probably think there’s a pedophile ring in your local pizza parlor. and no one gives the slightest damn about what you think about what any judge or jury decides, thankfully.
The mass media and .gov create narratives.
Anyone who questions any of those narratives is a “nutter”.
Got it.
If that's the case, then he's got a good issue for appeal.
Bttt.
5.56mm
“Juries determine facts.”
No, they don’t. They make decisions based upon whatever evidence, absence of evidence, or narratives the judge allows them to hear.
Plenty of jury verdicts have been overturned on appeal because the jury based a verdict on biased information.
The Alex Jones verdict is likely going to be tossed on appeal and, oddly, it’s when the case hits the appellate court that we’re more likely to see a fair hearing of the anomalies and stipulated (agreed upon) facts in the case.
That’s assuming the appellate court doesn’t toss the case entirely.
This article is a load of nonsense.
a) It’s standard in defamation cases that you can’t make a 1st Amendment defense UNLESS you prove that the speech was not defamatory. The court has already found that Jones failed to do that.
b) Making arguments that the court was unfair is something you can do on appeal, not at trial. Again, this is standard.
c) The third point has nothing at all to do with “arguing his innocence” as the article claims, but is about arguing his net worth (to mitigate damages he can pay I assume). The judge is ruling since he failed to produce the documents to back up those arguments in discovery, then he can’t make the arguments. Again, that’s a standard ruling. You can’t produce evidence in a trial that you didn’t produce during discovery unless you get special permission from the judge, and usually that is only going to happen if the other side doesn’t object. Otherwise it would probably result in a mistrial, which is probably what Jones’ lawyers were really trying to provoke.
Yep, glad there’s at least one other person here that has enough brains to read past the bias in the article and see that there’s really nothing here.
The judge is instructing the jury as to findings of fact in the case, which is the judge’s job.
He is a nut job.
So does that mean we should take away his rights?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.