Jump to content

Alex Jones


Hornius Emeritus

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

Which is more common?  I’m sure the judge would like a piece of his ass for all the shit he’s caused her, but she is probably also leery of anything appearing personal based on the liability judgement?  Is perjury one of those “juice isn’t worth the squeeze” court things where prosecutors/courts are loath to waste resources on?

The default judgment of liability has already been appealed and lost, so that's off the table.

However, everything that takes place during these hearings/trial has potential to provide appeal points for appeals of the damage awards.

So, yeah, she's going easy on him.

And, yeah, prosecutors are probably not wild about pursuing this kind of thing.  

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

56 minutes ago, Chopper said:

As I understand it - Per Texas rules of the court, the plaintiff's attorney, upon discovering material he believed to be privileged, was required to notify the defendant's attorney that he had material that appeared to be privileged and then wait 10 days for the defendant's attorney to respond. In those 10 days he was unable to read the material let alone use it for any purpose. There was apparently no response from Jones' attorney within the 10 days set out in the rules, so the defendant's privilege was waived, and the plaintiff's attorney was able to read and use the information at trial. I read that gave him less than a day to read as much as he was able to, and try to synthesize it for use at the trial. The attorney can't release the info to the public but he can and should be able to share it in response to legit requests or situations, in keeping with his professional legal responsibilities and ethics. So if he finds evidence of criminal behavior, evidence of perjury, or the like, he can refer it to legal authorities. Other parties are free to try to subpoena it, including the j6 committee, or other Sandy Hook plaintiffs...or perhaps even his exwife if she thinks he lied in court about his ability to pay alimony.

Good summary.  Any Texas civil practitioner who's been around long enough has both sent and received such a notice.  And best practice (to put it lightly) is to take it seriously.  Often, it's no big deal (a lot of privileged communications are pretty mundane).  Sometimes, it matters.  In any case, you look at the material and say "yes, I'd like to claw it back," or "no, that's not privileged" or "after consultation with my client, we are not asserting a privilege on that document," or something like that.  When you do massive data/doc dumps, a privileged email or two often makes it through, despite best efforts.  Of course, that assumes you made ANY effort to participate in discovery in good faith....which clearly didn't happen here.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Jones’ lawyer is a raging alcoholic right? I mean I know you can still be a top litigator and be a super hard drinker, but this guy just doesn’t give a fuck

i highly doubt it.  i honestly think he was beat down months ago by what has to be the single hardest client walking the earth and he just dgaf.  that's really unprofessional and bad, but i can see that.

if i recall, he came in midstream after Jones' prior lawyers who fucked up the discovery withdrew, so he was never going to get out from behind the 8 ball coupled with a ginormous fuck head of a client.  

still, no excuse for his behavior...

what a shitshow.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been able to find a clip of the "Perry Mason moment" other than the 2 minute one where Jones gets asked if he knows what perjury is. But I did find a summary of what was asked and answered. It appears that within the 2 minute clip about whether he knew what perjury was Jones hadn't understood the enormity of his attorneys' screw-up:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chopper said:

I haven't been able to find a clip of the "Perry Mason moment" other than the 2 minute one where Jones gets asked if he knows what perjury is. But I did find a summary of what was asked and answered. It appears that within the 2 minute clip about whether he knew what perjury was Jones hadn't understood the enormity of his attorneys' screw-up:

 

 

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

2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

Apparently they're pushing the idea that the whole trial is scripted.

 

It’s the “InstaHard” advertisement at the top of the video that really hammers home the legitimacy of InfoWars for me.

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

7 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

If anybody from Austin public access was going to rise to national prominence, why couldn’t it have been Beatles-lovin’ Reverend Ricky

rev_ricky_1.jpg

7 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Your disdain for asking Livia live is duly noted.

CMU4rS2U8AEUE6q.jpg

SCROTUM!!!!

7 hours ago, chainsaw said:

hope theyre having a productive time at the texas chili parlor

Yeah. Story has been told before but  a few years ago I went to lunch there  with @Pescado_Rojo @Kyrie Eleison and @Brisketexan, and they were out. Out of Chili.

At the Texas Chili Parlor. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Jones’ lawyer is a raging alcoholic right? I mean I know you can still be a top litigator and be a super hard drinker, but this guy just doesn’t give a fuck

His closing was good even though it was mostly irrelevant to damages.  I guess I see the angle from the defense, make a jury who did not find him liable doubt whether he really is. Similar to when a criminal defendant pleads guilty to a jury, requests jury punishment who then tries to spend the entire punishment trial trying to convince the jury that he isn't actually guilty. Don't understand why the plaintiffs attorney didn't object to the majority of his closing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chopper said:

As I understand it - Per Texas rules of the court, the plaintiff's attorney, upon discovering material he believed to be privileged, was required to notify the defendant's attorney that he had material that appeared to be privileged and then wait 10 days for the defendant's attorney to respond. In those 10 days he was unable to read the material let alone use it for any purpose. There was apparently no response from Jones' attorney within the 10 days set out in the rules, so the defendant's privilege was waived, and the plaintiff's attorney was able to read and use the information at trial. I read that gave him less than a day to read as much as he was able to, and try to synthesize it for use at the trial. The attorney can't release the info to the public but he can and should be able to share it in response to legit requests or situations, in keeping with his professional legal responsibilities and ethics. So if he finds evidence of criminal behavior, evidence of perjury, or the like, he can refer it to legal authorities. Other parties are free to try to subpoena it, including the j6 committee, or other Sandy Hook plaintiffs...or perhaps even his exwife if she thinks he lied in court about his ability to pay alimony.

After reading this post i move that we add another rep icon and call it "'Merica"

1341152253_PhotoResizer2021_06_26_09_43_

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

4 hours ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

The educational system ransacked by conservatives for decades, you mean.   

 

It’s akin to being handed a rental car with a speed governor and then complaining it’s not going fast. Of course it isn’t! Ownership decided higher performance is detrimental to their interests. The vehicle is performing as intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Bookman said:

I wonder if his lawyer didn't respond in 10 days on purpose.

I'm wondering what else is on the phone, besides the Sandy Hook stuff.  Wasn't Jones an organizer of trump's "rally" on 1/6, and in communication with trump during the time period the other phones have been wiped?  And if you're a lawyer in possession of that phone with those texts about an attempt to overthrow the government do you try to find some way to get those communications out there?  Or maybe I'm giving Reynal way too much credit, given his performance at this trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. Story has been told before but  a few years ago I went to lunch there  with [mention=251]Pescado_Rojo[/mention] [mention=671]Kyrie Eleison[/mention] and [mention=593]Brisketexan[/mention], and they were out. Out of Chili.
At the Texas Chili Parlor. 
Local Air Quality probably got a major victory that day.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. Story has been told before but  a few years ago I went to lunch there  with [mention=251]Pescado_Rojo[/mention] [mention=671]Kyrie Eleison[/mention] and [mention=593]Brisketexan[/mention], and they were out. Out of Chili.
At the Texas Chili Parlor. 
WTF was there to eat? I've been to fried chicken joints that were out of chicken and I dipped. Chili is kinda important at TCP, even for Enchiladas.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CTC2 said:

I think he did not know the civil rules nor understood how the other side would use it.  

Maybe. Or perhaps he hates Alex Jones.

I think there's a 0% chance of him getting disbarred for it, even if he did it maliciously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. Story has been told before but  a few years ago I went to lunch there  with [mention=251]Pescado_Rojo[/mention] [mention=671]Kyrie Eleison[/mention] and [mention=593]Brisketexan[/mention], and they were out. Out of Chili.
At the Texas Chili Parlor. 

we were all...
E7fBsrZXoAAlXcl?format=jpg&name=small

Local Air Quality probably got a major victory that day.


Cruel….but fair.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

I’ve known people who worked on his shows/sites (on the technical side - it was a job,  nothing more, and it was before the Sandy Hook stuff), and they felt that if it was run slightly differently, dialing back the awful shit like Sandy Hook, and if Jones and his buddies were less focused on their own bloviating, and more in tune with outside stuff, including looking at actual shady shit and actual conspiracy stuff, that Jones could have been as big as as Q/Qanon, only without the some of the stigma.  And Jones would have had more than one interview with Trump, and he wouldn’t be facing the loss of everything.

This pretty much sums up how the GOP has edged closer to the edge.  Like each red huckster, each red state has to outdo the other to land the ludicrous blow that will finally kill the spirit of the evil liberal and free the land for the pure and just agenda of the right.

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

5 hours ago, Bullneck said:

Mark Bankston

  • B.A., History, University of Texas, 2003
  • J.D, South Texas College of Law, 2009

STCL IN THE COURTHOUSE!!

4 hours ago, TXSG8R said:

So what happens with the perjury stuff? Does the judge wait until after the trial is done to level any punishment for that?  Does that require some separate hearing(s)? 

it’s referred to law enforcement for prosecution

I’d give up my bad card for a year in exchange for a day with Jones on the stand.

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

42 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Barnes is an attorney from Vegas who is a frequent guest on Infowars.  His tweet from last night did not age well:

 

 

 

People who follow Robert Barnes on Twitter include Sen. John Cornyn’s fringe jacket, Westlake resident and very serious adult Matt Mackowiak, and our own Will Franklin. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Captainant said:

You're correct. The child porn was returned by free speech systems and jones during one of the abortive discovery attempts in 2019. IMO, I think Jones' phone will be a bigger factor towards his Jan6 jeopardy, considering he took da fif a couple hundred times 

 

I think they’re gonna find actual child porn on his phone.  The SIM is finally kicking in for the good guys.  

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

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

After reading this post i move that we add another rep icon and call it "'Merica"

1341152253_PhotoResizer2021_06_26_09_43_

Surly Eminent Domain? I'm not opposed.

For the record, if memory serves, I selected it back when surly was first necessitated, which (I think) was before a lot of America's racist tards came out of the woodwork, and I was looking for a bird face.

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



×
×
  • Create New...