Jump to content

Alex Jones

Hornius Emeritus

By Hornius Emeritus
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

elguapo
elguapo
Gil Bang
Gil Bang

oh shit      

Beau Vine
Beau Vine

A large, disgusting receptacle filled with smelly rancid shit.  Also pictured, a porta potty.  

Posted Images

TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31516

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Chewbacca said:

Are we likely to get a verdict today?  I have shit to do but this trial has sucked me in.

At some point, I would expect financial-type experts to come in with some sort of quantification of the numbers, and I'd expect that to take most of a day.  But maybe not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm a little unclear here.  So, he produced an entire image of Jones' cell phone?  Assuming that was within the scope of requests for production, there's nothing wrong with that.  Jones may not like it, but there may not be much basis for withholding it.

I could see that the phone image might contain attorney-client privileged info and that could be a big issue.  But, like you said, opposing counsel has some obligation to notify producing counsel that there may be privileged stuff and he may want to move the court to claw it back on the basis of inadvertent production.

And, it's all more or less moot if opposing counsel isn't using it, although what constitutes "using" it may be a debate.  It doesn't just mean introducing it as evidence at trial, it could be used for more subtle purposes, like formulating questions.

I think plaintiff counsel said he notified defense counsel, but defense counsel never got back to him about clawing stuff back.  I think the failure to respond, assuming there was privileged information on the phone, is likely an ethical violation.  But unless he retains Sidney Powell I can't imagine a legal malpractice suit.  We would have won the trial, despite my client's repeated purjuring of himself and calling the jurors names, if only his lawyer kept violating the law by withholding discovery from the other side, isn't a great argument.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
South Austin

South Austin 52535

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

At some point, I would expect financial-type experts to come in with some sort of quantification of the numbers, and I'd expect that to take most of a day.  But maybe not.

I don’t think so. Judge is reading the charge now, followed by closing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31516

Posted
Posted
Just now, lemonlime said:

I think plaintiff counsel said he notified defense counsel, but defense counsel never got back to him about clawing stuff back.  I think the failure to respond, assuming there was privileged information on the phone, is likely an ethical violation.  But unless he retains Sidney Powell I can't imagine a legal malpractice suit.  We would have won the trial, despite my client's repeated purjuring of himself and calling the jurors names, if only his lawyer kept violating the law by withholding discovery from the other side, isn't a great argument.

Yeah, that may be "negligence in the air." 

One of the benefits, for trial types, of criminal practice is that it tends to be far less paper-intensive than civil litigation, and that includes things like producing phone images and privilege logs and things of that nature.

But a corollary to it is that criminal defense lawyers can be lousy with the paperwork.

This might not have even happened under Reynal's watch, though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31516

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, South Austin said:

I don’t think so. Judge is reading the charge now, followed by closing.

Oh, alright.  Well then.  Proof of damages for "dignitary" torts like defamation and IIED elude me.

Did they put on evidence of counseling bills or expenditures to correct misinformation?

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
South Austin

South Austin 52535

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Oh, alright.  Well then.  Proof of damages for "dignitary" torts like defamation and IIED elude me.

In the same boat. I have a commercial practice that usually doesn’t involve tort claims with accompanying punitive damages. I’ve only had to draft one jury charge that included punitives and the trial judge tossed the punitives question on no evidence grounds before submitting the charge to the jury, and that was over a decade ago. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17242

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

Jones failed to turn over text messages, says there weren't any regarding sandy hook.  Plantiff recently received complete image of Jones' phone, it's full of sandy hook texts. 

 

2 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

Says defense lawyer sent it over by mistake, it wasn't marked "privileged" anywhere. 

Proof of perjury, IMO. 

This is one of the greatest court room gotchas I've seen. Trump's missteps and foot in mouth are legenday but all were in depo.

Jones didn't lose his footing in the 2 minute clipped I watched but he was all over the place. "No I didn't know I gave you that info" and later "see I complied with discovery!"

"Do you recall saying under oath that you had no texts on your phone related to Sandy Hook?" "Uh uh uhhhhh..."

The J6 Committee will be requesting trial evidence from the plaintiff attorney any minute now.

Edited by Chopper
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SimonBolivar

SimonBolivar 10958

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It ain't a new phenomenon....

image.png

Sure, but they didn't know any better. We now have the breadth of human knowledge in our pockets at all times. You can read everything about Alex Jones in 2 minutes if you were in a coma for the last 30 years and you'd know that he's a fraudster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29957

Posted
Posted

The plaintiff closer could be a better speaker with a more efficient presentation. Maybe it's the sound over Zoom, but he seems repetitive and he doesn't know how to pause to punctuate a point.

I doubt this impacts the jury's decision. Just surprising to someone who doesn't see much courtroom argument and oratory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, South Austin said:

In the same boat. I have a commercial practice that usually doesn’t involve tort claims with accompanying punitive damages. I’ve only had to draft one jury charge that included punitives and the trial judge tossed the punitives question on no evidence grounds before submitting the charge to the jury, and that was over a decade ago. 

I would think, although again I'm not in TX so maybe it's different there, but practiced med mal defense, the IIED damages would be (1) bills for psychiatric treatment, therapy, etc., (2) ancillary losses such as lost wages if couldn't work because too upset, maybe for security due to Jones' sycophants harassing them, etc., and then (3) pain and suffering damages, which would be amorphous, and based on what the jury thinks is appropriate based on the plaintiffs' testimony about their suffering.

I'm still confused on the punitives aspect, though, as I've only ever seen that as part of a bifurcated trial, and would need economic expert testimony about Jones' assets, revenues, etc.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sbbruin

Sbbruin 21865

Posted
Posted
What an embarrassment to our educational system and species in general that so many people spend so much money falling for Alex Jones.

I just saw a piece of shit Toyota with a "the media is the virus" bumper sticker with the infowars logo. Go get 'em tiger. Fucking morons
Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 24900

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

What an embarrassment to our educational system and species in general that so many people spend so much money falling for Alex Jones.

he got y'all on the penis enlargement supplement, that tends to turn the brain off pretty reliably.  those ads are worse than a Don Lapre infomercial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blotto

Blotto 23560

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Sure, but they didn't know any better. We now have the breadth of human knowledge in our pockets at all times. You can read everything about Alex Jones in 2 minutes if you were in a coma for the last 30 years and you'd know that he's a fraudster. 

Honestly, that makes the problem worse. because its also much easier to find reams of misinformation and bullshit that backs up whatever crackpot theory people want to believe. It used to be difficult and/or costly to publish books, get published in newspapers, broadcast on TV, etc... The internet has just about completely eliminated those barriers. I can promise you those inclined to follow Alex Jones arent spending time researching why he is a fraud. confirmation bias is real. 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pescado_Rojo

Pescado_Rojo 19427

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Sure, but they didn't know any better. We now have the breadth of human knowledge in our pockets at all times. You can read everything about Alex Jones in 2 minutes if you were in a coma for the last 30 years and you'd know that he's a fraudster. 

Now do Trump...

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ten Bears

Ten Bears 2482

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Chopper said:

 

This is one of the greatest court room gotchas I've seen. Trump's missteps and foot in mouth are legenday but all were in depo.

Jones didn't lose his footing in the 2 minute clipped I watched but he was all over the place. "No I didn't know I gave you that info" and later "see I complied with discovery!"

"Do you recall saying under oath that you had no texts on your phone related to Sandy Hook?" "Uh uh uhhhhh..."

The J6 Committee will be requesting trial evidence from the plaintiff attorney any minute now.

image.thumb.png.b161f08187110b674f5a939fac811f4c.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SimonBolivar

SimonBolivar 10958

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Blotto said:

 I can promise you those inclined to follow Alex Jones arent spending time researching why he is a fraud. confirmation bias is real. 

Oh 100% and that's why it's an indictment of our educational system (culture) or on our species itself. I tend to lead towards species as other countries do have issues with "fake news", but I'm not sure how the country that produces the best research in our native language can fall for this crap at a far higher rate than our peers. That has to be cultural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cousin Strawberry

Cousin Strawberry 1261

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is surprisingly less shitty than I was expecting.  But the idea that Jones talked about other topics more than he talked about SH means it isn’t damaging, is just bad.  “Sure, I raped that chick. But that’s like .01 percent of all the times I had sex.”

Edited by Cousin Strawberry
Punct
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...