# About fucking time. The Sandy Hook families are suing Alex Jones for defamation **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [April 18, 2018, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612 "2018-04-18T03:05:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/21 "2018-04-18T19:55:38Z")
> [@tim-n-va](#): > > I am not a regular viewer but occasionally have watched clips. IIRC, he presents a lot of his “info” with wiggle room using phrases like “I don’t know, but these are unanswered questions”. Does that help in defending this in court? The law isn’t run by magic words. The question will come down to what his listeners are foreseeably likely to believe, and their subsequent acts of threats and harassment will be relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/22 "2018-04-18T20:17:32Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > The law isn’t run by magic words. The question will come down to what his listeners are foreseeably likely to believe, and their subsequent acts of threats and harassment will be relevant. That, and how likely the jury is to sympathize with him vs. the plaintiffs. If the jury doesn’t like him, they don’t have to accept his weasly language. This case has bad facts for the defense, there may be nothing they can do to compel the plaintiffs to settle outside of court. I’ve a feeling this isn’t about the money. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/23 "2018-04-18T21:27:30Z")
_ **The jury is directed to acquit.** _ Alex Jones’ show is just entertainment, parody. The First Amendment may not allow you to yell ‘Fire!’ in a theater, but it lets you tell obvious jokes. Jones will continue to proclaim on-air that he’s 100% serious, but he won’t be under oath then. On the stand in a courtroom, he and his lawyers will be laughing about the idea that anyone could take him seriously. His fans will never know about this — Fox News will report only on his acquittal, not the reason why. Sorry. Next case. ETA: “Acquit” is probably the wrong word in a civil trial. Sue me! ---
**Author:** ![Nawth\_Chucka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c57346/32.png) [@Nawth\_Chucka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nawth_Chucka)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/24 "2018-04-18T21:48:56Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > IANAL but I hope the law is that to be guilty of defamation, a person would need to know there was a lack of evidence against those defamed. Jones, as I understand it, could point to existing evidence that a reasonable person could concur would appear on its face to cast aspersions on those defamed. > > Jones’ defense then would be to say Look here, I have reasonable cause for believing these people did what I said they did, and as a protected citizen, I would hope that the conviction need not be on whether the data was later found factually correct, but whether a reasonable person might believe it is plausible. > > To take it to an extreme, if Leonard Pelletier is exonerated, does he have a defamation case against everyone who believed the evidence against him was compelling, and publicly said so? A defamation case should not hinge on whether you were wrong, but rather whether you knew you were wrong and defamed anyway. If you’re not a lawyer, what did you mean [when you said were an attorney](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20907217&postcount=11)? May the families win - win big, bankrupt Jones and chill the other maniacs out there from continuing to spread their profitable lies that hurt and divide people. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/25 "2018-04-18T22:00:43Z")
I have my doubts no matter how tight the case they have is. 1. There will be at least one person who claims to be unbiased but is a big fan of Alex Jones or his ilk who will end up on the jury and vote for him no matter the evidence. 2. The outcome of the the Deans suing G. Gorldon Liddy over the latter calling Mrs. Dean basically a hooker. Hung jury and dismissal. Liddy was beside himself with joy and was considered untouchable regarding similar lawsuits. Note: Parody is not, repeat _not_, grounds from immunity to lawsuits. Esp. of this kind. People have overgeneralized some limited cases. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/26 "2018-04-18T22:10:24Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > _ **The jury is directed to acquit.** _ Alex Jones’ show is just entertainment, parody. The First Amendment may not allow you to yell ‘Fire!’ in a theater, but it lets you tell obvious jokes. > > Jones will continue to proclaim on-air that he’s 100% serious, but he won’t be under oath then. On the stand in a courtroom, he and his lawyers will be laughing about the idea that anyone could take him seriously. His fans will never know about this — Fox News will report only on his acquittal, not the reason why. That argument didn’t work in his child custody case. Whether it will work in a defamation case, I have no idea. The bar for defamation is very high. ---
**Author:** ![TimeWinder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bcef8e/32.png) [@TimeWinder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TimeWinder)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/27 "2018-04-18T22:19:02Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > On the stand in a courtroom, he and his lawyers will be laughing about the idea that anyone could take him seriously. To which the opposing lawyers will present several dozen cases of his fans doing exactly that. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2018, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/28 "2018-04-18T22:46:34Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > _ **The jury is directed to acquit.** _ Alex Jones’ show is just entertainment, parody. The First Amendment may not allow you to yell ‘Fire!’ in a theater, but it lets you tell obvious jokes. > > Jones will continue to proclaim on-air that he’s 100% serious, but he won’t be under oath then. On the stand in a courtroom, he and his lawyers will be laughing about the idea that anyone could take him seriously. His fans will never know about this — Fox News will report only on his acquittal, not the reason why. > > Sorry. Next case. > > ETA: “Acquit” is probably the wrong word in a civil trial. Sue me! The law isn’t a fool. Sure, there’s no guarantee that the plaintiffs will win, but no competent judge is going to fall for this level of transparent pretense. There’s mountains of evidence that people listen to Alex Jones, believe him, and act on what they believe in ways that harm Jones’s targets. You don’t have a First Amendment right to defame private citizens. It’s not an easy case, but it’s far from a directed verdict. Foreseeability. Alex Jones has enough evidence of his influence in the real world that he won’t be able to hide behind a smokescreen of “but I’m just kidding.” (And the phrase your looking for in a civil case is “judgment for the defendant.”) ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Bill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mr.Bill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Bill)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/29 "2018-04-19T00:58:10Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > I hope not as well. Depending on the venue rules, they might ask for $x but if the jury is incensed enough the award could be a lot higher. > > Money is nice, but it’s not going to be Jones’ money, it’ll be coming from his personal insurance policy most likely. This won’t affect him _at all_ in any meaningful way. But I wonder if they can also seek a non-monetary award, such as, “Jones has to shut the hell up about everything forever”. Or something like that. If the award is big enough, his insurance company will likely raise his premiums or possibly even decide that continuing to insure him is a bad business decision. If that happens, and he cannot get a reasonably (whatever that means to him) priced replacement policy, maybe he will decide to retire. It’s a long shot, but we can hope! ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/30 "2018-04-19T04:27:40Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > I have my doubts no matter how tight the case they have is. > > 1. There will be at least one person who claims to be unbiased but is a big fan of Alex Jones or his ilk who will end up on the jury and vote for him no matter the evidence. Good thing the requirements for civil trials is not a unanimous verdict. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/31 "2018-04-19T04:56:09Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Good thing the requirements for civil trials is not a unanimous verdict. In Connecticut it must be unanimous. As it is in most states these days. See [here](https://www.jud.ct.gov/JI/Civil/Civil.pdf) (pdf) Section 2.9-3. I thought the same as you before I looked it up. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/32 "2018-04-19T07:16:24Z")
> [@John\_Bredin](#): > > A reasonable person believes that the kids killed in a school, and their parents, were actually crisis actors and nobody died at Sandy Hook? Despite a parade of local police, paramedics, hospital personnel, media, neighbors, etc. who actually saw the aftermath of the shootings including dead and wounded children? There aren’t enough :rolleyes: for that in the entire universe! > > [Incredulous reaction off]Yes, I presume that would be his defense. I think we can be fairly certain it isn’t going to work, though. I didn’t say he was right. I said I see no evidence that what he did was done with a malicious or reckless intent that would support to a judgment against him. It is frightening to consider living in a society where you can be punished for just being intellectually mistaken or misled. And you are obliged to shut up just in case your view doesn’t prevail as the official one. ---
**Author:** ![BeeGee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b5a626/32.png) [@BeeGee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeeGee)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/33 "2018-04-19T08:37:17Z")
In his child custody case last year, his attorneys basically said " He’s just putting on an act for a show. " I hope that this is a well timed civil case that will not be settled out of court. I hope they’re going to use this opportunity to expose him for the big fat liar that he is. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/34 "2018-04-19T11:58:40Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > I didn’t say he was right. I said I see no evidence that what he did was done with a malicious or reckless intent that would support to a judgment against him. He’s making baseless accusations against innocent people and causing them tremendous harm. There’s more than sufficient evidence just from his own broadcasts to support a defamation claim. > [@](#): > > It is frightening to consider living in a society where you can be punished for just being intellectually mistaken or misled. And you are obliged to shut up just in case your view doesn’t prevail as the official one. This is not what is happening in the case of Alex Jones. He is repeatedly and elaborately lying about people without any reasonable basis and causing them serious harm. There’s absolutely no reason that should be protected in our society. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/35 "2018-04-19T13:12:34Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > _ **The jury is directed to acquit.** _ Alex Jones’ show is just entertainment, parody. The First Amendment may not allow you to yell ‘Fire!’ in a theater, but it lets you tell obvious jokes. > > Jones will continue to proclaim on-air that he’s 100% serious, but he won’t be under oath then. On the stand in a courtroom, he and his lawyers will be laughing about the idea that anyone could take him seriously. His fans will never know about this — Fox News will report only on his acquittal, not the reason why. > > Sorry. Next case. > > ETA: “Acquit” is probably the wrong word in a civil trial. Sue me! In US law, satire and humor are indeed not legally actionable. Here’s a very concise description: > **[Satire v. Defamation: A Legal Explanation - RM Warner Law | Defamation Law,...](https://kellywarnerlaw.com/satire-v-defamation)** > > “With cases involving outrageous parody and satire, the path of least resistance has been to find the ‘speech’ non-defamatory as a matter of law. The The issue, though, will be: is what Alex Jones did indeed “satire” or “humor”? You can’t merely claim something as humorous or satirical to one audience (that is, lawyers and judges) and turn around and treat it as true to another (your fans). This is similar to the assertion that he’s “just asking questions” (a defense that is, of course, somewhat incompatible with the defense that his statements are humor or satire): the trier of fact has to look to see what the true intent of the statements were. If the trier of fact concludes they were intended to be taken as truthful statements indicating these parents were liars and frauds, or that the maker was recklessly indifferent to whether they were so taken or not, he’s likely to be found liable. On the other hand, if the trier of fact concludes that they were obvious parody or satire, akin to The Onion, then he will be found not liable. ---
**Author:** ![Nawth\_Chucka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c57346/32.png) [@Nawth\_Chucka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nawth_Chucka)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/36 "2018-04-19T14:42:07Z")
> [@BeeGee](#): > > In his child custody case last year, his attorneys basically said " He’s just putting on an act for a show. " I hope that this is a well timed civil case that will not be settled out of court. I hope they’re going to use this opportunity to expose him for the big fat liar that he is. It would be a huge relief if he’d say what a big fat liar he is and has been. Perhaps if he has to start, finish and interrupt his program every 5 minutes to remind his viewers he is probably lying. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/37 "2018-04-19T14:46:55Z")
Now I’ve never listened to his show, but as I said above, the “About” page from his website seems to present the show as news. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/38 "2018-04-19T18:11:22Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > I didn’t say he was right. I said I see no evidence that what he did was done with a malicious or reckless intent that would support to a judgment against him. It is frightening to consider living in a society where you can be punished for just being intellectually mistaken or misled. And you are obliged to shut up just in case your view doesn’t prevail as the official one. Intellectually mistaken or misled? That would require something resembling facts to support his assertion, and you’re more than welcome to provide those. Alex Jones is a weasel who’s goal is to lie and mislead gullible people into listening to his show and buying his “products”. Those lies have led some of those to harass and make threats against family members of massacre victims, and he CONTINUED TO PUSH THAT NARRATIVE. His whole “I’m joking” bullshit wasn’t believed in his child custody case, and it sure as hell shouldn’t be offered as a defense of a shitbag here. ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/39 "2018-04-19T18:29:23Z")
> [@mikecurtis](#): > > I think Alex Jones is an idiot, but I wonder how far this suit will get. IANAL, but doesn’t a defamation lawsuit have to show actual damage. One man yelling “crisis actors” compared to the entire rest of the American media telling the truth doesn’t seem to me to cause any harm to reputation. And doesn’t entertainment media enjoy a privileged position effectively shielding him from claims of defamation. > > I hope the families prevail, but I just dont see it. > > mc But it isn’t just one guy doing the yelling. There have been documented cases of other people harassing the Sandy Hook parents in real life. [At least one person has already gone to jail for this](http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/newtown-shooting-harassment-judy-richards-1.4149630), so I think it’s pretty safe to say they’ve met the burden of proving actual damage. > [@John\_Bredin](#): > > A reasonable person believes that the kids killed in a school, and their parents, were actually crisis actors and nobody died at Sandy Hook? Despite a parade of local police, paramedics, hospital personnel, media, neighbors, etc. who actually saw the aftermath of the shootings including dead and wounded children? There aren’t enough :rolleyes: for that in the entire universe! And on top of all that is the timing. Jones and his ilk are notorious for jumping on the “False Flag Crisis Actors!!!” bandwagon within hours, sometimes just _minutes_, of these sorts of attacks taking place. There’s no way he can claim to have made a reasoned review of the relevant evidence, and reached a (possibly wrong, but defensible) conclusion so rapidly. He’s jumping to ridiculous conclusions almost immediately, which would seem to me to be a textbook example of reckless disregard for the truth. > [@Malthus](#): > > Heh, it’s an old technique, “just asking questions”. Sometimes abbreviated as “JAQing off”. 😃 > > [Just asking questions - RationalWiki](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions) > > Will it work? My guess is that it will not. > [@Malthus](#): > > This is similar to the assertion that he’s “just asking questions” (a defense that is, of course, somewhat incompatible with the defense that his statements are humor or satire): the trier of fact has to look to see what the true intent of the statements were. > > If the trier of fact concludes they were intended to be taken as truthful statements indicating these parents were liars and frauds, or that the maker was recklessly indifferent to whether they were so taken or not, he’s likely to be found liable. > > On the other hand, if the trier of fact concludes that they were obvious parody or satire, akin to The Onion, then he will be found not liable. Exactly. JAQing off works in forums like this because we ultimately can’t hold the JAQer to account for their BS. But the courts can! The judge literally has the legal power to call them out on their crap and make it stick, equivocation notwithstanding. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2018, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612/40 "2018-04-19T18:35:38Z")
> [@BeeGee](#): > > In his child custody case last year, his attorneys basically said " He’s just putting on an act for a show. " I hope that this is a well timed civil case that will not be settled out of court. I hope they’re going to use this opportunity to expose him for the big fat liar that he is. But Jones was on the stand under oath and said it wasn’t an act. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/about-fucking-time-the-sandy-hook-families-are-suing-alex-jones-for-defamation/812612.md?page=3)