Alex Jones

[lemonlime 5503]

10 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

It doesn't help his clients, but if he had been the 'good guy', it's possible the J6 Commission never learns of the existence of phone copy.  And his clients were never getting $150 million no matter what, as much as I would like them to.

Why would the J6 Commission not learn of the phone copy?  I'm not suggesting he should have destroyed the phone copy.  Or kept it secret.  Or left any of it to Raynal or Jones. Just that perhaps it shouldn't have been revealed as a gotcha moment in the middle of trial. 

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Buddy, I don't think there's anything that would have convinced those two hold out jurors. I'm not sure how or why you're saying it's Bankstons fault that his opposition didn't follow the rules, and that it somehow reflected poorly on him and his case. 

It took him four fucking years to get jones in court. Do you really think calling an audible at the 11th hour for what could just be another fuck fuck game, putting your trial prep in jeopardy, is a good strategy?

This smacks of the same enlightened centrism that lacks criticality to think past "well this was non normative so it must be bad". The entire fucking clown show was instigated by the defense! Fucking blame them for the shit show, not the plaintiffs forced into it 

I think he got caught up in the publicity, and maybe could have done a better job.  But coulda woulda shoulda.  I'm more disturbed by all the people fine with throwing out privilege because Jones is a bad guy.  It's like the people who argue we should have punitive bail amounts because someone out on bail ran people over with a car.  Making policy decisions based on how the worst of the worst act is not helpful to anyone.

And no I don't think those 2 hold outs would have changed.  I do question what quantum of damages the other 10 would have assessed had there been different trial tactics.  And I'm not sure what direction that goes in, but I'm floored by the same people yelling about what a travesty the low jury verdict was praising the plaintiff counsel a few posts later for questionable tactics.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

21 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Exactly.   If i found out my attorney had been legally given access to info that could potentially help a congressional commission investigating an insurrection of my country, and he didn’t pursue it because it may have offended some other lawyers collegial sensitivities I would be livid.  This is potential much more then about this individual case.

No one is saying he should have pursued it.  Quite the opposite, actually.

In fact, by invoking the procedure of Rule 193.3 and also taking it to the court for resolution as to whether privilege is waived, he makes it that much more certain which documents can be used in court, and possibly by the Committee.

And, I bet if you asked Bankston right now, or maybe in a few days when things cooled off a little, work wise, he'd probably say, yeah, I should have followed that up a little harder and gotten a solid ruling from the court that either privilege was waived or at least to which documents it validly attached, and also explored the violation of the protective order.

Is what he did enough?  Probably, but there's enough to raise a doubt.  And is he at least somewhat excused by being a one-legged man at an ass-kicking contest with a couple of asses that definitely need kicking? You bet.

Edited August 5, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Captainant 28386]

4 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I'm more disturbed by all the people fine with throwing out privilege because Jones is a bad guy.

Fortunately for you then, privilege was not thrown out in this case. It was waived by the defense by way of non response to a legal notice. If I ignore a traffic ticket to the point of it turning into a warrant and arrest, they aren't throwing out due process - they're following the letter of the law. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

10 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Fortunately for you then, privilege was not thrown out in this case. It was waived by the defense by way of non response to a legal notice. If I ignore a traffic ticket to the point of it turning into a warrant and arrest, they aren't throwing out due process - they're following the letter of the law. 

Actually, I'm not sure the issue was ever ruled upon.  As far as I can tell, no privileged documents were introduced into evidence or sought to be.

There's a lot of speculation about how the rule could/should/would be applied, but I'm not sure it's ever been squarely before the court.  I think the judge indicated she would entertain objections on privilege grounds to individual documents, perhaps taking into account the waiver issue, but never said yay or nay otherwise.

Also, as lawyers, we tend to be even-handed about application of rules.  You got to be, because assuredly one day you will be on the wrong end of the same or a similar mistake.  The Golden Rule very much applies in court, even if it doesn't anywhere else.

Edited August 5, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Bozo_Casanova 26773]

23 minutes ago, Upgrayedd said:

I… you… I’m a lawyer.  What did I do to you?

Punitive Damages, here. Sue Everybody. 

Edited August 5, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[Gil Bang 26176]

31 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I've had a terrible accident, sir. 

 

25 minutes ago, Upgrayedd said:

I… you… I’m a lawyer.  What did I do to you?

 

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Punitive Damages, here. Sue Everybody. 

C'mon assholes.  As funny as it is, this isn't the thread for it. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26773]

1 minute ago, Gil Bang said:

 

 

C'mon assholes.  As funny as it is, this isn't the thread for it. 

I don’t need to talk to you, Jerky.

[troph 25089]

4 hours ago, Foosters said:

FWIW, not prosecuting perjury is the norm across the board regardless of the suspect's wealth, status, or position. I have seen countless witnesses - both civilian and law enforcement - perjure themselves on the stand, get called on it, and go about their day. 

DA's will tell you it can be difficult to convince a jury that the person intended to perjure themselves, as opposed to "oops, you're right. I must have forgotten."

Tell that to bill Clinton.  

[Gil Bang 26176]

 

 

[Chooky 13337]

Do you have insurance? 

Yeah, but it's through a friend. 

[South Austin 53154]

57 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

C'mon assholes.  As funny as it is, this isn't the thread for it. 

I’ll wrap your fuckin’ head in with a ratchet!

[TwiceHorn 31987]

If the judgment isn't astronomical, FSS filing bankruptcy will likely actually aid the swift collection of the judgment.  It can't easily be dismissed now that he's filed.

[Captainant 28386]

So bit of a small internet moment, Bill Ogden (one of the plaintiff attorneys), was on discord and answering some questions about the case. The knowledgefight subreddit picked it up

Quote

Bill Ogden (u/BilliamWogs here on reddit) has also been on Discord (billyOhhhhh#7059) a little after the verdict and answered some questions. I'll quote his posts in full below:

We tried as hard as we could. I wish so badly that we could’ve done better than $4.1m. You guys were an Amazing supporting cast, and we can’t thank you enough for everything you’ve done to help and support us.

As some of you have already posted, because of the award, our punitive cap is $750k

Cap is $750k. He was sanctioned $1.5m on top of the $4.1, and Reynal will likely be facing another sanctions order before this case concludes.

Once the jury is released, I can disclose the reason for the number. With that said, punitive damages must be unanimous.

He says the punitive damages cap is $750k, and will be able to explain more after the jury is released. Seems like tomorrow may be the last day. 

Also, he said DOJ emailed them "immediately" when they mentioned the digital records in court, so that's nice at least. 

Edited August 5, 2022 by Captainant

[Gil Bang 26176]

2 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

Exactly.   If i found out my attorney had been legally given access to info that could potentially help a congressional commission investigating an insurrection of my country, and he didn’t pursue it because it may have offended some other lawyers collegial sensitivities I would be livid.  This is potential much more then about this individual case.

and possibly put the motherfucking scumbag tormentor that said that I'm an actor and that my dead child never existed...maybe put his ass in prison?  where do I sign up? 

[Cousin Strawberry 1273]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Punitive Damages, here. Sue Everybody. 

Laser surgery!

[Dahobbs 18185]

46 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

If the judgment isn't astronomical, FSS filing bankruptcy will likely actually aid the swift collection of the judgment.  It can't easily be dismissed now that he's filed.

Lot of creditor power now that he filed. And assets can't just disappear as easily. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

34 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So bit of a small internet moment, Bill Ogden (one of the plaintiff attorneys), was on discord and answering some questions about the case. The knowledgefight subreddit picked it up

He says the punitive damages cap is $750k, and will be able to explain more after the jury is released. Seems like tomorrow may be the last day. 

Also, he said DOJ emailed them "immediately" when they mentioned the digital records in court, so that's nice at least. 

That would make sense if the only damages awarded are non-economic, i.e. pain and suffering, mental anguish.  Which would make some sense.

You'd have to think that, assuming they're recoverable, medical bills, and various other expenditures they've had would have been worthy of proof.

Pozner is the guy I was thinking of on NPR that's another plaintiff in another case.  He moved a few times, hired security and had to do all kinds of crap because of Jones.

Edited August 5, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Captainant 28386]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That would make sense if the only damages awarded are non-economic, i.e. pain and suffering, mental anguish.  Which would make some sense.

 

TBH they didn't present any evidence or argument for a monetary amount from therapy or security from the loonies, etc, so I'm not sure what else they'd be awarding damages for

[TwiceHorn 31987]

Just now, Captainant said:

TBH they didn't present any evidence or argument for a monetary amount from therapy or security from the loonies, etc, so I'm not sure what else they'd be awarding damages for

That's kind of what I have been asking.  Maybe that kind of thing isn't recoverable, per se.

[JimmyTwoTimes 82]

I got these Mexicans up on my roof…

[Dahobbs 18185]

15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

TBH they didn't present any evidence or argument for a monetary amount from therapy or security from the loonies, etc, so I'm not sure what else they'd be awarding damages for

 

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's kind of what I have been asking.  Maybe that kind of thing isn't recoverable, per se.

Most plaintiff lawyers are cautious with economic damages. They can be an anchor on your case. Unless you have a lot of them, you may not want to present them at all. If the jury hears 20k in medical for instance, then the absolute most they are going to give you is 10x with pain and suffering. If you don't present the medical expenses, the jury tends to feel free to award higher amounts. 

Edited August 5, 2022 by Dahobbs

[Hank Scorpio 17924]

Whole lot of backseat drivers who don’t try cases in this thread. Farrar and Bankston took a big swing and hit a single. It happens. 

[ChiTownDoc 21323]

https://old.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/wg14kd/homophobic_alex_jones_trying_to_explain_why_he/
 

There are people who watch porn, surly and then there are liars... but he wasn't watching porn.

That's pretty much a direct quote from the video.

[Dahobbs 18185]

6 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Whole lot of backseat drivers who don’t try cases in this thread. Farrar and Bankston took a big swing and hit a single. It happens. 

This. Plus, it doesn't sound like it was an incredibly expensive case to try. 4 million is a solid verdict. And as horrendous as Alex Jones is, it's hard to get around the fact that ultimately the families primary damages are from the loss of their child, which Jones didn't cause. 

[TexasEd 8248]

Many of the parents, not sure of it being these parents in particular, said they reason they were carrying this out was not for the money but to get Jones shut down so he can't keep doing this.

The 4M won't shut him down but...

3 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

Exactly.   If i found out my attorney had been legally given access to info that could potentially help a congressional commission investigating an insurrection of my country, and he didn’t pursue it because it may have offended some other lawyers collegial sensitivities I would be livid.  This is potential much more then about this individual case.

The information from discovery going to the Jan 6 commission could result in criminal charges.  Hard to do a show from jail.

1 hour ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Whole lot of backseat drivers who don’t try cases in this thread. Farrar and Bankston took a big swing and hit a single. It happens. 

I don't try cases either but with a Travis County jury they were probably capped at 50M tops and 10-20 would have been a good verdict.

Remember we had Gabrielle Nestande Marchbanks drive over a woman while passed out drunk and try to hide the evidence who was acquitted of intoxication manslaughter and only served 180 days in county jail for criminally negligent homicide.

Edited August 5, 2022 by TexasEd

[Brisketexan 106618]

It is often a mistake to be someone's second  lawyer on a case.  Sometimes, the ego gets in the way, as in "ok the last guy was clearly a dumbfuck, I can fix this."
And for some guys, often criminal defense lawyers, "all press is good press" comes into play.

It’s almost NEVER a good idea to be the second lawyer. Bad clients are the most poisonous part of the practice of law. I just wave those “opportunities” off now.

I’m not surprised. As effective as the plaintiffs’ lawyers were at making Alex look stupid and reckless, they did not do a great job at proving the extent to which Alex’s behavior harmed their clients. I had a hard time following their damages theme, frankly. 

Isn't punitive damages capped?

Or 1 or 2 jurors were siding with him.  

Not sure if it’s true, but I have read that for truly gross negligence the cap can be waived. The kicker on all of the punitive though for me, especially seeing how only 10 of the jurors signed off on the actual damages, is that for punitive damages it has to be unanimous vote

All good points. Needs to be unanimous, and I don’t know if it will be - that 10-2 verdict on actuals tells me that 2 jurors likely sided with Alex. And as mentioned in another post, exemplaries will be capped at 750k, because all of the actual damages were non-economic. Not a big hit. At all.

The biggest hit truly may be the DOJ and Jan6 committee getting hold of that phone.

[CTC2 2858]

56 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Whole lot of backseat drivers who don’t try cases in this thread. Farrar and Bankston took a big swing and hit a single. It happens. 

Maybe.  

I have tried a lot of civil cases to verdict in Texas and other states and I think the plaintiff's attorneys were pedestrian at best and the judge was terrible.  If possible, go back and watch their closing.  AJ's attorney had no business handling a civil case.  He was in way over his head.  Given the posture of the case even a shitty lawyer could have gotten the same result.  Non trial lawyers may have been shocked at how the judge dressed down AJ but that was nothing compared to some of the things I have seen.  In fact, I have seen a judge stop the trial when it was obvious a witness was not telling the truth and call the District Attorney to come down and observe the rest of the proceedings.  The fact that the lawyers almost got into a fist fight tells me that none of them were afraid of the judge. 

Understand that some others may not agree but just my two cents.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

 

Most plaintiff lawyers are cautious with economic damages. They can be an anchor on your case. Unless you have a lot of them, you may not want to present them at all. If the jury hears 20k in medical for instance, then the absolute most they are going to give you is 10x with pain and suffering. If you don't present the medical expenses, the jury tends to feel free to award higher amounts. 

Yeah, I thought the conventional wisdom was that non-economic damages were a multiple of economics usually.

But I guess if you ain't got much, better to let their imaginations run wild.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

1 hour ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Whole lot of backseat drivers who don’t try cases in this thread. Farrar and Bankston took a big swing and hit a single. It happens. 

Back when I was in school and for a while thereafter, despite the political liberality of Austin, Travis County had a rep for pretty stingy juries, overall.  Not sure if that's because Travis County includes nether regions or political liberality doesn't necessarily equate to jury generosity.    Travis County is kind of low on the working folk.

[Brisketexan 106618]

Maybe.  
I have tried a lot of civil cases to verdict in Texas and other states and I think the plaintiff's attorneys were pedestrian at best and the judge was terrible.  If possible, go back and watch their closing.  AJ's attorney had no business handling a civil case.  He was in way over his head.  Given the posture of the case even a shitty lawyer could have gotten the same result.  Non trial lawyers may have been shocked at how the judge dressed down AJ but that was nothing compared to some of the things I have seen.  In fact, I have seen a judge stop the trial when it was obvious a witness was not telling the truth and call the District Attorney to come down and observe the rest of the proceedings.  The fact that the lawyers almost got into a fist fight tells me that none of them were afraid of the judge. 
Understand that some others may not agree but just my two cents.

I don’t disagree. Plaintiffs counsel executed some plays, but they were plays that were laying there for the taking. Defense counsel genuinely had no idea what he was doing. He didn’t know the rules, and that’s a really shitty place to start from.
And I like Maya, she’s a good judge. But she’s also still a bit new, and I suspect this sort of dynamic was far beyond her skill set developed by experience. She surely had never seen anything as shitshow-ish as this, and it’s hard to know how to play it. I agree, I’d like to see more judges with a lot less tolerance for bullshit. I actually liked Sparks, in large part for that reason - he wasn’t having your bullshit. Wasn’t ever a problem for me, but I saw more than a few jackasses get slammed by him. And I liked it.

Aside: man, this might have been much more entertaining if this is been in front of Triana back when she was a district court judge. I’ve seen her go OFF on misbehaving lawyers (and I don’t mean a little bit -she went full pissed off cuban).

[TwiceHorn 31987]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I don’t disagree. Plaintiffs counsel executed some plays, but they were plays that were laying there for the taking. Defense counsel genuinely had no idea what he was doing. He didn’t know the rules, and that’s a really shitty place to start from.
And I like Maya, she’s a good judge. But she’s also still a bit new, and I suspect this sort of dynamic was far beyond her skill set developed by experience. She surely had never seen anything as shitshow-ish as this, and it’s hard to know how to play it. I agree, I’d like to see more judges with a lot less tolerance for bullshit. I actually liked Sparks, in large part for that reason - he wasn’t having your bullshit. Wasn’t ever a problem for me, but I saw more than a few jackasses get slammed by him. And I liked it.

Aside: man, this might have been much more entertaining if this is been in front of Triana back when she was a district court judge. I’ve seen her go OFF on misbehaving lawyers (and I don’t mean a little bit -she went full pissed off cuban).

Didn't look to me like she lost control of her court, and I have seen that happen, but she may have been too tolerant of the bs.  She certainly seemed to call it, early and often, but maybe not harshly enough.

As I think we speculated before, she seemed to be trying to avoid committing any error that would support an appeal.  Some judges give zero fucks about appeals.

[Beau Vine 55824]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think the point is that the pecadillo over the inadvertent disclosure didn't change the outcome in any meaningful way.

* peccadillo

[ERhine 1937]

Most plaintiff lawyers are cautious with economic damages. They can be an anchor on your case. Unless you have a lot of them, you may not want to present them at all. If the jury hears 20k in medical for instance, then the absolute most they are going to give you is 10x with pain and suffering. If you don't present the medical expenses, the jury tends to feel free to award higher amounts. 

I don’t know that it’s “most” yet, but depending on the case this is correct. If the medical is 20K it absolutely makes sense. I’ve had cases where the medical is mid six figures and that’s the approach I’m taking at trial.

[MAUFRAIS 6732]

You punch your chest and make it disappear?

[RPM 26560]

This was a slap on the wrist for a guy that goes around slapping people in the nuts.

[South Austin 53154]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Back when I was in school and for a while thereafter, despite the political liberality of Austin, Travis County had a rep for pretty stingy juries, overall.  Not sure if that's because Travis County includes nether regions or political liberality doesn't necessarily equate to jury generosity.    Travis County is kind of low on the working folk.

It’s pretty much been that way since I’ve been practicing in Austin.  Travis County juries on the whole are not a diverse group, even less so than Austin as a city. I haven’t tried a case to a jury in about six years or so (it’s been mostly bench trials for me), but my last pool was mostly white, educated, and upper middle class. Jury consultants who do this for a living can explain better than I why those demographics don’t translate well to large verdicts. 

Case in point:  A lawyer I know had a pretty good car wreck case several years ago that went to a jury. Significant medical expenses, and she was a dentist, so there was a decent chunk of lost past and future income. Some soft damages on top of that. He wasn’t asking for the lottery. Really just trying to make her whole with some pain and suffering on top of that. The jury gave him the jelly of the month club. Coincidentally, a friend who’s a corporate lawyer somehow made it onto his jury, and she told me that she wanted to give the plaintiff more, and she had to practically fight the other jurors just to give her the money they ultimately awarded.

[BrickHorn 18424]

13 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

So, @BrickHorn or anyone else who watched the trial extensively, you'd kind of think at some point, the plaintiffs would have more or less "totted up" the number they were asking for, or at least that's the way you do it in more "financially oriented" cases.

Did that happen?  Do we know what number the plaintiffs were asking for?

I wasn’t able to watch the entire trial; mainly caught it in bits and pieces. So it’s possible they did that at some point. But I caught most of the closings and did not come away with a strong, concrete understanding of the plaintiffs’ damages theory. (Again, it’s possible I was distracted when / if they addressed this.)

My take is that Bankston and crew spent too much time earning Internet points with gotchas and didn’t tie it all together to show that, not only is Alex a dunce and a jerk, but he actually hurt these two people by a measurable amount in specific, relatable ways. Oh and he’s never going to stop unless y’all really bankrupt him.

[Dahobbs 18185]

33 minutes ago, South Austin said:

It’s pretty much been that way since I’ve been practicing in Austin.  Travis County juries on the whole are not a diverse group, even less so than Austin as a city. I haven’t tried a case to a jury in about six years or so (it’s been mostly bench trials for me), but my last pool was mostly white, educated, and upper middle class. Jury consultants who do this for a living can explain better than I why those demographics don’t translate well to large verdicts. 

Case in point:  A lawyer I know had a pretty good car wreck case several years ago that went to a jury. Significant medical expenses, and she was a dentist, so there was a decent chunk of lost past and future income. Some soft damages on top of that. He wasn’t asking for the lottery. Really just trying to make her whole with some pain and suffering on top of that. The jury gave him the jelly of the month club. Coincidentally, a friend who’s a corporate lawyer somehow made it onto his jury, and she told me that she wanted to give the plaintiff more, and she had to practically fight the other jurors just to give her the money they ultimately awarded.

I'd love to hear more your friend's experience. It is so hard to get behind the curtain sometimes. I certainly know that whenever I've done mock trials and listened in our jurors deliberating that the things they get stuck on are always surprising. 

That said, as stingy as Austin can be for a liberal city, the other big counties in Texas have delivered some monstrous verdicts over the last couple of years, including the $7.3 billion verdict against Charter in Dallas county recently (https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/article263847752.html). 

[DigglerontheHoof 21516]

Once again, zero to little consequences for being evil.  
none of these cunts ever get their just due.

And I guaran-fucking-tee you those texts won’t mean shit, either.  He’ll go back to saying SH was a hoax and the election was stolen…all the whole getting filthier rich.

[chainsaw 10243]

15 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, the rules supply the answer.  And Reynal was obligated to do more at that point.

But something else amiss is that Bankston apparently did not disregard the link, which he probably should have, and said some more about it.

As in, "No, I'm not disregarding the link.  I'm entitled to most of that information and if you want to assert privilege or otherwise withhold it, you need to follow Rule 193.3."

I think we have the exact same opinion on this, then. Although whether Bankston "probably should have" kept that door closed is a really tough question implicating morality, ethics, and quite possibly even his patriotic duty to the American people.

I think he knew it was a bitch move to disregard Reynal's request to disregard the link. He probably said to himself that Jones's lawyers (including Reynal) had subjected him and his clients to hundreds of much worse transgressions. That's when his mind entered "After all, why not?" territory and he clicked that link.

I shed no tears for Reynal though. It's pretty trivial to lock the door once you know it shouldn't have been unlocked and opened.

Onward to the J6 committee.

[RomaVicta 30500]

8 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Once again, zero to little consequences for being evil.  
none of these cunts ever get their just due.

And I guaran-fucking-tee you those texts won’t mean shit, either.  He’ll go back to saying SH was a hoax and the election was stolen…all the whole getting filthier rich.

It's what you get when a huge plurality of the people determine truth purely from the voice carrying it with no circumspection. 

There was a time when persons of any political party or no political party would at some point stop and say, "now that's just a fuckin' lie." No more. A cripplingly large number of persons take truth from the pulpit (not the Bible or Jesus) or the guy wearing the home team's jersey.

Malign Idiot World

[TwiceHorn 31987]

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I'd love to hear more your friend's experience. It is so hard to get behind the curtain sometimes. I certainly know that whenever I've done mock trials and listened in our jurors deliberating that the things they get stuck on are always surprising. 

That said, as stingy as Austin can be for a liberal city, the other big counties in Texas have delivered some monstrous verdicts over the last couple of years, including the $7.3 billion verdict against Charter in Dallas county recently (https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/article263847752.html). 

I've been out of touch with it for a while, but, back in the early oughts, maybe late 90s, the CCLs were kind of the plaintiff's preferred venues.

Almost all the judges set trial dates at about a year and rarely budged from them.  There may be some other factors at work there, but not sure what they are.  Six person juries maybe?

I always thought it kind of amusing that the janky little courtrooms in the Records Building were the site of some pretty good licks for plaintiffs.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

23 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

....but he actually hurt these two people by a measurable amount in specific, relatable ways. Oh and he’s never going to stop unless y’all really bankrupt him.

Were I on the jury, that is exactly what I would want to know with respect to the law as written (for what a jury can and cannot do/award). IOW, if the plaintiff had to move 'X' amount of times, I want to know what the actual physical costs were, and then am I allowed to additionally compensate for the stress that moving a household entails; if there were death threats, I want to know approximately how many and what steps were taken to deal with that. Each of those types of things has physical costs as well as time, stress, and so on and Alex Jones & Co. contributed to these costs over not just one day, but years. The young man (separate lawsuit that may have been dropped because he passed away in a house fire) that Jones initially named as the shooter was absolutely dragged through the mud before the actual perpetrator was identified.

8 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

He’ll go back to saying SH was a hoax

This specific event, I have my doubts. I would more likely believe Jones to instead rampage over the judge and judges in general, the law, and the court system and how everything is rigged against poor little (figuratively little) guys like Alex.

[South Austin 53154]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I always thought it kind of amusing that the janky little courtrooms in the Records Building were the site of some pretty good licks for plaintiffs.

I think I was there for one of my first hearings ever as a baby lawyer in 2000. I thought, “Where the fuck am I?”

[DigglerontheHoof 21516]

4 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Were I on the jury, that is exactly what I would want to know with respect to the law as written (for what a jury can and cannot do/award). IOW, if the plaintiff had to move 'X' amount of times, I want to know what the actual physical costs were, and then am I allowed to additionally compensate for the stress that moving a household entails; if there were death threats, I want to know approximately how many and what steps were taken to deal with that. Each of those types of things has physical costs as well as time, stress, and so on and Alex Jones & Co. contributed to these costs over not just one day, but years. The young man (separate lawsuit that may have been dropped because he passed away in a house fire) that Jones initially named as the shooter was absolutely dragged through the mud before the actual perpetrator was identified.

This specific event, I have my doubts. I would more likely believe Jones to instead rampage over the judge and judges in general, the law, and the court system and how everything is rigged against poor little (figuratively little) guys like Alex.

Why?  What’s to stop him?  He’ll rake in 10s of millions of dollars and, at worse, pay another $10-12m out for n damages/ attorney fees.

Hes still clearing millions while being an evil cunt.  That’s his game.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I think we have the exact same opinion on this, then. Although whether Bankston "probably should have" kept that door closed is a really tough question implicating morality, ethics, and quite possibly even his patriotic duty to the American people.

I think he knew it was a bitch move to disregard Reynal's request to disregard the link. He probably said to himself that Jones's lawyers (including Reynal) had subjected him and his clients to hundreds of much worse transgressions. That's when his mind entered "After all, why not?" territory and he clicked that link.

I shed no tears for Reynal though. It's pretty trivial to lock the door once you know it shouldn't have been unlocked and opened.

Onward to the J6 committee.

I'm not real excited about calling Bankston on the carpet for this, beyond what I have mentioned.  For one thing, we don't know what happened subsequently.  He may have disregarded the link after digging through it.  Reynal may have sent it again with the same or most of the same shit.  I dunno.

The other thing that kind of informs me on this, is that I have been on both sides of this scenario in federal court, where there isn't a rule with a firm time limit, but sort of a sliding scale test for waiver that takes a lot of things into account.  And that was the way it was in Texas courts before Rule 193.3.  Waiver of privilege can be a harsh remedy or result and the federal way of handling means you cant just wait a fixed period and obtain waiver and means you have to the court to get a ruling on it, or risk having documents excluded on the basis of privilege.

There's an advantage to having a known rule on the situation like 193.3 in that everyone should know what is the deal and what to do.  But it seems a little sharp to try to trigger the 10 day period, as stealthily as possible, wait for your opponent to fuck up, and declare victory on privilege without a court ruling on it.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

1 minute ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Why?  What’s to stop him?  He’ll rake in 10s of millions of dollars and, at worse, pay another $10-12m out for n damages/ attorney fees.

Hes still clearing millions while being an evil cunt.  That’s his game.

I can't argue with your point--he could certainly do that. But I suspect he needs to pivot a little and move on to newer territory.

[DigglerontheHoof 21516]

1 minute ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I can't argue with your point--he could certainly do that. But I suspect he needs to pivot a little and move on to newer territory.

I hope, for the SH families’’sake, you’re right.  

[South Austin 53154]

Alex Jones is going to be an unrepentant shitbag, to the Sandy Hook families and everyone else.

[Captainant 28386]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But it seems a little sharp to try to trigger the 10 day period, as stealthily as possible, wait for your opponent to fuck up, and declare victory on privilege without a court ruling on it.

After four years of the defense abusing the discovery process and dealing exclusively in bad faith on the matter, I couldn't disagree with you more. It's a fucking war against jones, not some prim and proper trial. The defense fucked up because of their refusal to participate in discovery and outright fraud and perjury during that process. 

No fraud from the defense, no privilege issues. Stupid games and stupid prizes.