Boiling Denim said:

---

Ribavirin said:

---

Anonymous Source said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

He is being punished for not having he correct political views. This will be reduced greatly on appeal if not tossed completely.

---

Jesus Christ.

He's being punished for continually pushing a narrative that his dumb **** followers were stupid enough to believe, and then took it upon themselves to go harass the families of dead children at their homes. A number of them had to move several times over just to escape these *******s that bought in to the bull**** he was peddling non stop.

He deserves everything he gets, and if you don't believe that, I feel sorry for you.

---

Since when is he responsible for other's actions ?

---

Yeah that Charlie Manson guy was ok in my book. I mean he didn't actually murder anyone

---

so adults aren't always responsible for their actions? You sound like Soros DA

This makes perfect sense and justice is served. The guy who murdered the kids was held accountable for $1.5 million. The guy who said terrible things about it pays $965 million.

For some perspective: pic.twitter.com/JnheGHsuWl

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) October 13, 2022

Ribavirin said:

---

Grown adults got their feelings hurt you must pay !!!!

---

Go actually read up on this before you say something so mind-numbingly stupid. Also look up the wikipedia article on defamation.

****ing embarrassing that you posted this, much less that 32 idiots starred it.

If Alex agreed and preached on behalf of the woke left, he would walk away and this BS wouldn't even exist.

larry culpepper said:

---

Ribavirin said:

---

Grown adults got their feelings hurt you must pay !!!!

---

Go actually read up on this before you say something so mind-numbingly stupid. Also look up the wikipedia article on defamation.

****ing embarrassing that you posted this, much less that 32 idiots starred it.

---

Oh look I found one of those adults do you cry yourself to sleep at night? Hope you can make it through the day.
.

Maybe try to understand the concept of defamation before you start your internet tough guy shtick. Maybe also try to understand that these parents whose kids got murdered have a lot more grievances than getting their feelings hurt.

How much do you think the families will actually receive? There is no way he has $965 million

I was probably all they could possibly get from the estate. Whereas Jones is mega wealthy and has a huge following.

for the record I'm skeptical of the damages number. But I also don't feel sorry for that POS at all

Anonymous Source said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

He is being punished for not having he correct political views. This will be reduced greatly on appeal if not tossed completely.

---

Jesus Christ.

He's being punished for continually pushing a narrative that his dumb **** followers were stupid enough to believe, and then took it upon themselves to go harass the families of dead children at their homes. A number of them had to move several times over just to escape these *******s that bought in to the bull**** he was peddling non stop.

He deserves everything he gets, and if you don't believe that, I feel sorry for you.

---

Sorry you let your feelings get in the way of common sense. I feel sorry for you.

Why are some acting as though there's no way this BILLION dollar judgement is "political"? It's not crazy to think a ludicrous punitive damage assessment has some political motivation to it.

I wouldn't know Alex Jones from Adam or any other Tom, Dick, or Harry, other than occasionally seeing a clip of him ranting on one of my twitter timelines or an occasional discussion on Texags every so often over the years that have indicated that this ranting dude with all these conspiracy theories ended up being right about some of them.

Sandy Hook crisis actor false claims aside, the reason people might suggest this was political is because it seems that a lot of his conspiracy theories and topics he likes to rant about are against the establishment, which is now obviously the elitist-controlled and government-worshiping left, and it seems that leftists know the most about him because they're all programmed to hate him and pretend he's this leader of their enemies or something. I find it hard to believe there really is a dedicated following that takes him so seriously as to go harass a parent of a Sandy Hook victim because this podcaster thought this parent was an actor, but I guess that happened. It seems the harasser should be punished criminally as well as evaluated for mental health issues, yet instead of focusing on the harasser, our system got to a place where the podcaster was assessed a BILLION dollars by a court ten years after the Sandy Hook incident. That seems nuts and it seems political no matter how much anyone tries to argue about how wrong it was for Jones to say there were actors (it was wrong) and no matter how much sympathy anyone has for the poor dead kids and their grieving parents (everyone feels bad for them). It's possible to feel terrible for the parents who lost their children in that horrible tragedy, and feel sorry for them that they were harassed by a deranged "dedicated Alex Jones listener". I don't think anyone is arguing that Alex Jones was morally right for making up wild theories that ended up hurting those parents emotionally. I just don't see a BILLION dollar justification.

The suggestion that the establishment is burying someone who speaks out often against the establishment is not far-fetched or illogical, IMO. What other BILLION dollar defamation judgements are there to compare this to?

larry culpepper said:

---

Maybe try to understand the concept of defamation before you start your internet tough guy shtick. Maybe also try to understand that these parents whose kids got murdered have a lot more grievances than getting their feelings hurt.

---

These are the same people that only have the mental capacity to reply with "but mean tweets" because they lack any ability to critically think. They're team politics sycophants, happy to live a life of hypocrisy so they can always 'own' a boogieman enemy they've built up so much in their heads. And here they are defending a guy they perceive is on their side only because he chooses a common enemy...but not defending him with any logic at all. Just 'sOrRy YoUr fEeLiNgS aRe HuRt"

Sounds exactly like the nuts on the left, but both sides can't see their reflection in the mirror.

These parents had kids who were brutally murdered and some lunatic with hundreds of thousands of radio listeners spread lies about them being crisis actors and being paid off in a big conspiracy to push gun control. These grieving families got relentlessly harassed by the listeners and some had to move multiple times because they were harassed at their homes and feared for their safety

Reasonable minds can disagree on the jury award. But in what universe is this just "getting your feelings hurt"???

larry culpepper said:

---

I was probably all they could possibly get from the estate. Whereas Jones is mega wealthy and has a huge following.

for the record I'm skeptical of the damages number. But I also don't feel sorry for that POS at all

---

Ah, so the amount of money has nothing to do with the act but whether or not the person has money. So I guess you think it is fair that if a rich person commits a crime they have to pay far more than a poor person because.... why exactly?

Once again I think Alex Jones is a terrible person but I also believe in equal justice under the law. This is not justice, not remotely. The largest actual damages shown are that a couple of the families apparently felt they needed to move because of threats (that Jones did not make but his listeners apparently made). The logic on that also seems odd since the community supported them so not sure why they would move over that but ok. Not sure that is justification for a generational wealth transfer. The mental anguish is also relevant but once again the real cause of that anguish is someone killed their child not someone saying bad things afterward.

I know you hate Jones and want him cancelled and destroyed. I just seriously doubt you feel the same about someone you agree with who said incorrect things about someone else who then was harassed by their supporters but not physically harmed. If you can't honestly say that you feel the same standard should apply then you are advocating tyranny.

The trial was not political and it say it was just shows that you did not actually follow any of the trial. Alex Jones' rants on his show about the trial is not reflective of the actual trial. He lied about what was actually happening in the courtroom - shocking, I know.

The reality is that Alex Jones is the one who tried to injected politics into the trial, but the court ruled that it was inadmissible. The court focused the testimony and evidence on Jones, his actions, and the effects on the family. The verdict was not about Jones' politics or the politics of the jury. It was about how reprehensible he was and the years of lies he spewed about Sandy Hook.

With that said, the amount of damages is very high and will be lessened upon appeal.

aggie93 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

I was probably all they could possibly get from the estate. Whereas Jones is mega wealthy and has a huge following.

for the record I'm skeptical of the damages number. But I also don't feel sorry for that POS at all

---

Ah, so the amount of money has nothing to do with the act but whether or not the person has money. So I guess you think it is fair that if a rich person commits a crime they have to pay far more than a poor person because.... why exactly?

---

This wasn't a criminal case, it was a civil case. And yes, in a civil case the jury can use the defendants net worth to determine some damages. Especially when the defendant refuses to defend his actions.

larry culpepper said:

---

These parents had kids who were brutally murdered and some lunatic with hundreds of thousands of radio listeners spread lies about them being crisis actors and being paid off in a big conspiracy to push gun control. These grieving families got relentlessly harassed by the listeners and some had to move multiple times because they were harassed at their homes and feared for their safety

Reasonable minds can disagree on the jury award. But in what universe is this just "getting your feelings hurt"???

---

Alex Jones' listeners universe

Ribavirin said:

---

Boiling Denim said:

---

Ribavirin said:

---

Anonymous Source said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

He is being punished for not having he correct political views. This will be reduced greatly on appeal if not tossed completely.

---

Jesus Christ.

He's being punished for continually pushing a narrative that his dumb **** followers were stupid enough to believe, and then took it upon themselves to go harass the families of dead children at their homes. A number of them had to move several times over just to escape these *******s that bought in to the bull**** he was peddling non stop.

He deserves everything he gets, and if you don't believe that, I feel sorry for you.

---

Since when is he responsible for other's actions ?

---

Yeah that Charlie Manson guy was ok in my book. I mean he didn't actually murder anyone

---

so adults aren't always responsible for their actions? You sound like Soros DA

---

Jones is responsible for their actions because he is the one who spread the falsehoods they acted on. If I call your employer and tell them you have a history of theft and sexual harassment and they fire you, who are you going to go after?

It brings me joy to see the legal system sitting upon the face of idiots who's mouths write checks their ass can't cash.

Mike Lindell, you're up next.

I thought for sure you were going to say Anthony Fauci or Adam Schiff.

Tikka's garbage post proves the political nature of the award. Complicit Marxists like Tikka just want to punish their political enemies using the courts and lawfare.

aggie93 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

I was probably all they could possibly get from the estate. Whereas Jones is mega wealthy and has a huge following.

for the record I'm skeptical of the damages number. But I also don't feel sorry for that POS at all

---

Ah, so the amount of money has nothing to do with the act but whether or not the person has money. So I guess you think it is fair that if a rich person commits a crime they have to pay far more than a poor person because.... why exactly?

Once again I think Alex Jones is a terrible person but I also believe in equal justice under the law. This is not justice, not remotely. The largest actual damages shown are that a couple of the families apparently felt they needed to move because of threats (that Jones did not make but his listeners apparently made). The logic on that also seems odd since the community supported them so not sure why they would move over that but ok. Not sure that is justification for a generational wealth transfer. The mental anguish is also relevant but once again the real cause of that anguish is someone killed their child not someone saying bad things afterward.

I know you hate Jones and want him cancelled and destroyed. I just seriously doubt you feel the same about someone you agree with who said incorrect things about someone else who then was harassed by their supporters but not physically harmed. If you can't honestly say that you feel the same standard should apply then you are advocating tyranny.

---

Just going to answer this question and not get back into the debates here:

The amount of money paid by shooter's family most likely is policy limits on their homeowners' insurance.

And as for the amount that can be afforded affecting the amount that is awarded, that's very true when it comes to punitive damages. Someone explained it well above -- punitives are both punishment and deterrent. If you want to send a message to someone that what he did was unacceptable and try to deter him from doing it again, you come up with a number that has some actual deterrent effect. If a small business scraping out a couple thousand a month -- maybe hit them for 6 months profit. If Exxon, that number is much bigger. Try to make it more than pocket money that they don't care about.

Here, there is no real basis for hitting him for close to a B, but there is the reason for the disparate amounts between perp and Jones. And in the end, choosing that amount for whatever reason -- political, virtue signally, etc. -- will actually make it harder for the families to collect anything any time soon (if they ever will). That amount is basically reversible error and juror misconduct ("don't let emotion influence your judgment" is a core instruction to juries) that will ensure that the appellate court will reverse and remand for further proceedings to get a better number. Then back up to appeals, rinse repeat.

guadalupeag said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

I was probably all they could possibly get from the estate. Whereas Jones is mega wealthy and has a huge following.

for the record I'm skeptical of the damages number. But I also don't feel sorry for that POS at all

---

Ah, so the amount of money has nothing to do with the act but whether or not the person has money. So I guess you think it is fair that if a rich person commits a crime they have to pay far more than a poor person because.... why exactly?

---

This wasn't a criminal case, it was a civil case. And yes, in a civil case the jury can use the defendants net worth to determine some damages. Especially when the defendant refuses to defend his actions.

---

When applied to this extreme it's morally wrong. I understand that it may be legal but it is wrong. Hell OJ Simpson had to pay $33 million for the wrongl death of 2 people and he was found to have actually pulled the trigger. The actual damages in this case that could be tied to Jones were minimal. No one was assaulted or injured. A few people apparently felt they needed to move. Some people were apparently given harassing phone calls. That's all wrong and I have no issue with Jones having to pay. A Billion dollars though is absolutely insane and has no connection to justice.

You are also leaving out the very important point that Jones DID apologize repeatedly. He admitted his actions were wrong and showed contrition. That's far better than defending his actions. His apology should have reduced the award btw not increased it because this is supposed to be about mental anguish he caused, if he apologized that certainly shows restitution.

Like I said, I think Jones is a terrible human but I think he deserves fair treatment and justice. If he doesn't get it then it is all too easy to lower the bar for the next person. Then the next. If you can't see how this is being abused already you aren't paying attention. By the time they cross the line for you it will be far too late because you have essentially gone along with mob justice so long as it is against someone you dislike.

Why won't anyone answer what damages Alex Jones caused, or why they're worth a bijiliion dollars?

Infowars man bad. No can discuss on radio show.

I havent looked too deep into it but I imagine most of the damages are punitive

I don't think anyone believes that the damages are worth a bill.

Emotional distress and mental anguish are real consequences of this type of behavior and the law allows a jury to put a monetary value on that. There are usually some hard costs involved -- like psychiatry bills in the past and future -- and then value based on loss of enjoyment in life, fear, anxiety, etc. that is caused by the wrongful actions.

And then there are the punitives when the actions are so unconscionable that the person needs to be taught a lesson.

larry culpepper said:

---

I havent looked too deep into it but I imagine most of the damages are punitive

---

"Haven't looked too deep"
"I imagine"

These are pretty stark departures from your fanatical statements that this isn't just based on feelings.

HtownAg92 said:

---

I don't think anyone believes that the damages are worth a bill.

Emotional distress and mental anguish are real consequences of this type of behavior and the law allows a jury to put a monetary value on that. There are usually some hard costs involved -- like psychiatry bills in the past and future -- and then value based on loss of enjoyment in life, fear, anxiety, etc. that is caused by the wrongful actions.

And then there are the punitives when the actions are so unconscionable that the person needs to be taught a lesson.

---

So why wouldn't any randos in an Internet forum who discussed this be just as culpable as Jones?

TikkaShooter said:

---

It brings me joy to see the legal system sitting upon the face of idiots who's mouths write checks their ass can't cash.

Mike Lindell, you're up next.

---

Yeah, how could anyone ever think this was political? Mouth breather.

OG UNF said:

---

HtownAg92 said:

---

I don't think anyone believes that the damages are worth a bill.

Emotional distress and mental anguish are real consequences of this type of behavior and the law allows a jury to put a monetary value on that. There are usually some hard costs involved -- like psychiatry bills in the past and future -- and then value based on loss of enjoyment in life, fear, anxiety, etc. that is caused by the wrongful actions.

And then there are the punitives when the actions are so unconscionable that the person needs to be taught a lesson.

---

So why wouldn't any randos in an Internet forum who discussed this be just as culpable as Jones?

---

Because Jones is a public figure who used his platform with millions of listeners to spend hours upon hours of time on his radio show making defamatory remarks, riling up his followers, many of who went on to harass the families of the victims.

Can you post more about these incidents? What did the listeners actually do to the family that caused all the distress?

OG UNF said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

I havent looked too deep into it but I imagine most of the damages are punitive

---

"Haven't looked too deep"
"I imagine"

These are pretty stark departures from your fanatical statements that this isn't just based on feelings.

---

And yet i'm still right about that.

and I did follow the trial on the merits, just not so much the jury award of damages.

They're saying because he question the legitimacy of the event, it emboldened some of his listeners to harass the parents of the dead children.

I'm calling bs, because he never called for people to harass the parents or do anything of the sort. You can't control what people do. If this ends up going through, it's going to set a precedent that just about anyone can be sued for the things they say. It's an assault on 1st amendment rights.

OG UNF said:

---

HtownAg92 said:

---

I don't think anyone believes that the damages are worth a bill.

Emotional distress and mental anguish are real consequences of this type of behavior and the law allows a jury to put a monetary value on that. There are usually some hard costs involved -- like psychiatry bills in the past and future -- and then value based on loss of enjoyment in life, fear, anxiety, etc. that is caused by the wrongful actions.

And then there are the punitives when the actions are so unconscionable that the person needs to be taught a lesson.

---

So why wouldn't any randos in an Internet forum who discussed this be just as culpable as Jones?

---

Don't know what they said, so it could be the difference between "I think Alex Jones is right" and "These parents are actors who faked the deaths of their kids". One is defamatory and one is not. Also, what sort of audience do the randos have for their "publication"? And does the rantings of a rando on the internet cause damage to reputation for the families? Necessary for a defamation case.

But assuming they are liable for defamation, you have to find them and convince a lawyer that it is worthwhile to sue them. And consider recovery -- you can't get blood from a stone. So the guy who started it all, has millions of listeners and went on unrelenting warpath is the better (and possibly only) target.

That's bs, that's not defamation.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

OG UNF said:

---

HtownAg92 said:

---

I don't think anyone believes that the damages are worth a bill.

Emotional distress and mental anguish are real consequences of this type of behavior and the law allows a jury to put a monetary value on that. There are usually some hard costs involved -- like psychiatry bills in the past and future -- and then value based on loss of enjoyment in life, fear, anxiety, etc. that is caused by the wrongful actions.

And then there are the punitives when the actions are so unconscionable that the person needs to be taught a lesson.

---

So why wouldn't any randos in an Internet forum who discussed this be just as culpable as Jones?

---

Because Jones is a public figure who used his platform with millions of listeners to spend hours upon hours of time on his radio show making defamatory remarks, riling up his followers, many of who went on to harass the families of the victims.

---

Good thing that MSNBC and CNN never do this. Much less The View. They never make defamatory remarks to rile up their listeners and certainly those listeners never call up the people they are defaming and harass them.

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Can you post more about these incidents? What did the listeners actually do to the family that caused all the distress?

---

Here's one that took 10 seconds of searching:

Quote:

---

In more than an hour of emotional testimony during which he often fought back tears, Neil Heslin said he has endured online abuse, anonymous phone calls and harassment on the street....

"What was said about me and Sandy Hook itself resonates around the world," Heslin said. "As time went on, I truly realized how dangerous it was. ... My life has been threatened. I fear for my life, I fear for my safety."...

Heslin said his home and car have been shot at, and his attorneys said Monday that the family had an "encounter" in Austin after the trial began in the city and have been in isolation under security.

---

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/02/1115269280/sandy-hook-alex-jones-trial