U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 12:56 PM
 
Location: DMV Area/NYC/Honolulu
12,917 posts, read 6,638,921 times
Reputation: 12489

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Um, wasn't that the Charles Manson defense?
Far different. Manson essentially ran a crime family, something similar somewhat to the mafia. The "boss" of any mafia family will be guilty of murder for ordering the murder, even if he didn't personally take part in the murder. Alex Jones is screeching into a television camera. There is no expectation that random strangers will take his vile, hateful language and harass families of victims of tragic events. Jones had no personal relationship with these freaks, unlike Manson or a mafia crime boss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 01:02 PM
 
Location: DMV Area/NYC/Honolulu
12,917 posts, read 6,638,921 times
Reputation: 12489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil75230 View Post
"Infliction of Emotional Distress" is a thing. Furthermore, Defamation of Character and Slander are things, too. It hurts people because accusations of major dishonesties are a serious impediment to your reputation, which can hurt your job opportunities and community standing (and if the charge is extreme enough, put their life at risk). Verbal cruelty's well known to inflict emotional distress as well.

Like it or not, the old school way of trivializing cruelty by making the victim's reaction the issue and not the perpetrator's behavior are fast coming to a close -- and I welcome it.
The concept of infliction of emotional distress isn't intended to deal with alleged harm caused from mere speech; hence, see that the Supreme Court rejected a similar claim against the Westboro Baptist Church brought by military family members that the church disgracefully picketed and verbally attacked. The Court did so on First Amendment grounds.

Defamation of character and slander? While not protected by the First Amendment, you have to prove that such behavior actually caused you harm that a court can account for. The argument that the Sandy Hook families received character or similar harm from a loony bin like Alex Jones is laughable and gives Jones more reach and credit than he is due. The only legitimate harm that these families faced came from those people who actually harassed them via email/phone calls/etc. Not from a loon screaming into a video camera for YouTube upload.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:15 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA
5,078 posts, read 3,492,603 times
Reputation: 8269
Poor Mr Jones. Is there a Go Fund Me account set up by his devoted followers? I suppose he's now a martyr to his rabid fan base.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:39 PM
 
Location: AZ
2,206 posts, read 467,695 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
You're lost.

Agreed. Which is about discovery and has nothing to do with the lawsuit. It's about Jones wanting a dismissal in order to not pay lawyers fees. Again this particular case was about discovery and not about the actual merits of whether Jones slandered.


Quit deflecting. Our discussion is not about that and the only reason you are bring it up is to save face. I'm still waiting. Admit it, you were wrong.
And you’re clueless.

You’ve yet to provide any proof to the contrary.

Admit it, bootlickers and sycophants have to support their dear propaganda artist. You would know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:10 PM
 
10,936 posts, read 13,820,674 times
Reputation: 6430
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
The concept of infliction of emotional distress isn't intended to deal with alleged harm caused from mere speech; hence, see that the Supreme Court rejected a similar claim against the Westboro Baptist Church brought by military family members that the church disgracefully picketed and verbally attacked. The Court did so on First Amendment grounds.

Defamation of character and slander? While not protected by the First Amendment, you have to prove that such behavior actually caused you harm that a court can account for. The argument that the Sandy Hook families received character or similar harm from a loony bin like Alex Jones is laughable and gives Jones more reach and credit than he is due. The only legitimate harm that these families faced came from those people who actually harassed them via email/phone calls/etc. Not from a loon screaming into a video camera for YouTube upload.
Who do you think inspired those loons? They just decided to do this out of thin air from their trailers in Texas or wherever? No, they heard about the crisis actor thing from Jones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:12 PM
 
2,222 posts, read 943,888 times
Reputation: 5441
The lawsuit is for defamation, and yesterday the Texas appeals court denied Jones' efforts to throw out the case and ordered him to pay court costs.

"SEPTEMBER 5, 2019 3:57PM (UTC)
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has been dealt yet another defeat in court, where he recently lost an appeal of a defamation lawsuit over his false statements about the Sandy Hook massacre.

The Texas Court of Appeals not only ruled against Jones by striking down his appeal of the suit against him. It also ordered Infowars to "pay all costs" related to the legal effort, according to HuffPost.

The target of the appeal was Neil Heslin, the father of a 6-year-old boy named Jesse Lewis, who was among the 20 children and six adults who were murdered by Adam Lanza in the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012. Heslin is among nine family members who lost loved ones who are suing Jones for defamation after he claimed that the shooting was a hoax and the victims were "crisis actors." Jones has relentlessly fought back against the lawsuits.

An attorney representing Heslin hailed the decision — and offered a scathing assessment of the possible legal troubles ahead for Jones.

"Mr. Heslin is very pleased with the decision of the Court of Appeals dismissing InfoWars’ appeal and ordering Mr. Jones to pay costs," attorney Mark Bankston told Right Wing Watch. "After InfoWars wasted everyone’s time on a frivolous appeal, we can now return to the trial court where we intend to hold Mr. Jones fully accountable for his disgusting defamation of Mr. Heslin."

Regardless of opinions posted here, Jones will have to let a Texas jury decide. Whether he win or loses, he has lost already and will lose more in money and reputation. Hopefully he has just begun to pay for his "free speech".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Texas
27,211 posts, read 11,437,262 times
Reputation: 6270
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
What is direct influence?

Do you mean like threats Jones himself made to lawyers and judges? Or death threats his listeners made to MANY others?
Name the exact threats Jones made on eir lives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
Some loser from deep dark WV (Manson) singing Helter Skelter seems tame compared.
lol You also think Trump said white nationalists were good people so why give your partisan judgement credibility?

None of this surprises me. When those same grown children want government to run their lives because they aren't adult enough to take responsibility, of course those led by the nose bots are going to think others are easily controlled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:22 PM
 
Location: DMV Area/NYC/Honolulu
12,917 posts, read 6,638,921 times
Reputation: 12489
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72 View Post
Who do you think inspired those loons? They just decided to do this out of thin air from their trailers in Texas or wherever? No, they heard about the crisis actor thing from Jones.
Where do you draw the line? Some loons on the internet read the savage, hate-filled sermons of someone calling for the stoning of gays in Saudi Arabia and attacks gays on the streets in NYC. Who do you think is responsible or should be responsible for these assaults in NYC? Inspiration without control shouldn't lead to legal liability. You control what you do, not someone else generally speaking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:43 PM
 
2,222 posts, read 943,888 times
Reputation: 5441
Good theory, but when you view the legal system, practice and theory are often at odds. In this case I'll actually be glad to see the legal system screw someone whether he is guilty or not. Won't be the first time or the last.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
Where do you draw the line? Some loons on the internet read the savage, hate-filled sermons of someone calling for the stoning of gays in Saudi Arabia and attacks gays on the streets in NYC. Who do you think is responsible or should be responsible for these assaults in NYC? Inspiration without control shouldn't lead to legal liability. You control what you do, not someone else generally speaking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 02:47 PM
 
16,712 posts, read 4,389,174 times
Reputation: 11656
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
Where do you draw the line? Some loons on the internet read the savage, hate-filled sermons of someone calling for the stoning of gays in Saudi Arabia and attacks gays on the streets in NYC. Who do you think is responsible or should be responsible for these assaults in NYC? Inspiration without control shouldn't lead to legal liability. You control what you do, not someone else generally speaking.
Uh, the very basics......if you are an American as compared to a Saudi....different laws and responsibilities might apply to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top