6 ms·

The whole situation with Alex Jones has undermined the confidence I have with our court system and our government. Initially I thought there was some Mandela Ef

The whole situation with Alex Jones has undermined the confidence I have with our court system and our government. Initially I thought there was some Mandela Effect going on because I could have sworn I remembered Alex Jones losing a Sandy Hook civil suit case multiple times before. Turns out, he’s being sued multiple times by different sets of parents and from what I understand, this latest case isn’t the last one. Regardless of how justified this feels, I nevertheless worry that using the civil court system in this manner sets a dangerous precedent. Firstly, because this is a civil matter and not a criminal one, there is no protection against double jeopardy. He can keep getting sued over and over for the same thing. Indeed, it really looks like these parents/their attorneys are out to destroy Alex Jones through lawsuit after lawsuit. Second, fining someone a billion dollars is just ludicrous. Yes, I know he is not worth that much and will ultimately end up paying far less. But the mere idea that such a large fine was issued undermines confidence that the restitution is in any way reasonable. Not just because the number is so detached from reality, but because such sums look like the financial equivalent of the death penalty. I am very worried about how civil suits can be used to go after people. To me at least, there need to be additional protections along the lines of what we have in the Eighth Amendment. What I’m seeing with these Sandy Hook cases feels like cruel and unusual punishment. Also keep in mind that you do not have a right to an attorney in suits like these and you have to pay out of pocket. It is not unreasonable to think lawfare like this will be used against other people in the future.

rlpb 4y ago
> Firstly, because this is a civil matter and not a criminal one, there is no protection against double jeopardy. He can keep getting sued over and over for the same thing. Not by the same people, though. If he damaged ten people, he might owe damages to each of those ten people. That doesn't sound like a problem to me. > Second, fining someone a billion dollars is just ludicrous. It seems like your argument is that the sum is simply too large, and that the specifics of the case are irrelevant. This seems dangerous to me. If someone does actually cause that amount of damage, why should they not be civilly liable? Surely it depends on the specifics of the case to determine if they did cause that much damage or not? Otherwise, does everyone just get to cause as much damage as they like but have a cap on what they are held responsible for? That doesn't seem right to me. If someone wants to get involved in a course of conduct which can cause terrible damages to others, then they should also be responsible for that.
- CodeSgt 4y ago
  Do you truly think Alex Jones's speech inflicted a billion dollars worth of damage? I'd love to see an itemized bill demonstrating that. If he actually did cause that much real damage, sure, it would be fair. But I can't possibly conceive how he would have caused even $100k in real damages, much less a billion. It's equally, if not more dangerous, to fine people ludicrously large, arbitrary amounts of money because they spoke something that went against public opinion.
  - yarpnird 4y ago
    How much do you think being stalked, harassed, and threatened is worth?
    - CodeSgt 4y ago
      Not a billion dollars, certainly. And did Alex Jones himself do any or even actively encourage any of the stalking, harrasment, or threatening? If he did, I'd say he's certainly much more liable (still not a billion dollars worth of liability) but I've yet to see where he's done either. He made videos, and some deranged lunatics decide to act on the information in those videos.
      - simion314 4y ago
        Are you omitting intentionally that he has made profit from this, so it is a way to mine money from other suffering and from brainwashing idiots, he has a big profitable company, I think the judge evaluated the guys profits, so if he was a random idiot on the street that harass people he would not have got such a giant fine since the random idiot did not made giant profits. \\ I do not see why a real free speech advocate would protect he "right to harass/defame others for profit".
  - 8ytecoder 4y ago
    That’s what the jury evaluated and decided. Looks like you have an issue with the jury system itself.
caeril 4y ago
> The whole situation with Alex Jones has undermined the confidence I have with our court system If it makes you feel any better, Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family was fined SIX TIMES more than Alex Jones. 800k people dead for $6B versus a dozen families' feelings hurt for $1B. Our court system recognizes that the value of a human life is $7.5K, but the value of precious feelings is $83MM. This seems pretty fair to me. The good news is that punitive damages haven't been awarded yet. Hoping that the cost for hurt feelings rises north of $100M. Looking forward to suing everyone who said false statements about me in public. It's going to be an incredible payday, and I can parlay the winnings into running a drug operation and killing rural Americans with opioids and only pay a rounding error for everyone I murder. Can't wait. Edit: Apologies, HackerNews, are my numbers off? Am I factually incorrect? Are we seriously supporting the position that the Allies should have just hit Hitler with a $45B fine for the whole "Holocaust Thing" and called it even? I know addressing downvotes is frowned upon, but I'm genuinely curious why HN thinks feelings are worth eleven thousand times more than lives. Edit 2: Understood. Feelings really are worth four orders of magnitude more than lives, on this forum. Got it.
- CodeSgt 4y ago
  I agree with you and upvoted you, but your choice of language was a bit strong and bordered on inflammatory. That could explain the downvotes I think.
- Izkata 4y ago
  I suspect your post is sarcasm, but you didn't include any markers and I've seen this argument in earnest enough times that I can't just assume it is sarcasm.

rlpb 4y ago

> Firstly, because this is a civil matter and not a criminal one, there is no protection against double jeopardy. He can keep getting sued over and over for the same thing. Not by the same people, though. If he damaged ten people, he might owe damages to each of those ten people. That doesn't sound like a problem to me. > Second, fining someone a billion dollars is just ludicrous. It seems like your argument is that the sum is simply too large, and that the specifics of the case are irrelevant. This seems dangerous to me. If someone does actually cause that amount of damage, why should they not be civilly liable? Surely it depends on the specifics of the case to determine if they did cause that much damage or not? Otherwise, does everyone just get to cause as much damage as they like but have a cap on what they are held responsible for? That doesn't seem right to me. If someone wants to get involved in a course of conduct which can cause terrible damages to others, then they should also be responsible for that.

CodeSgt 4y ago
Do you truly think Alex Jones's speech inflicted a billion dollars worth of damage? I'd love to see an itemized bill demonstrating that. If he actually did cause that much real damage, sure, it would be fair. But I can't possibly conceive how he would have caused even $100k in real damages, much less a billion. It's equally, if not more dangerous, to fine people ludicrously large, arbitrary amounts of money because they spoke something that went against public opinion.
- yarpnird 4y ago
  How much do you think being stalked, harassed, and threatened is worth?
  - CodeSgt 4y ago
    Not a billion dollars, certainly. And did Alex Jones himself do any or even actively encourage any of the stalking, harrasment, or threatening? If he did, I'd say he's certainly much more liable (still not a billion dollars worth of liability) but I've yet to see where he's done either. He made videos, and some deranged lunatics decide to act on the information in those videos.
    - simion314 4y ago
      Are you omitting intentionally that he has made profit from this, so it is a way to mine money from other suffering and from brainwashing idiots, he has a big profitable company, I think the judge evaluated the guys profits, so if he was a random idiot on the street that harass people he would not have got such a giant fine since the random idiot did not made giant profits. \\ I do not see why a real free speech advocate would protect he "right to harass/defame others for profit".
- 8ytecoder 4y ago
  That’s what the jury evaluated and decided. Looks like you have an issue with the jury system itself.

caeril 4y ago

> The whole situation with Alex Jones has undermined the confidence I have with our court system If it makes you feel any better, Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family was fined SIX TIMES more than Alex Jones. 800k people dead for $6B versus a dozen families' feelings hurt for $1B. Our court system recognizes that the value of a human life is $7.5K, but the value of precious feelings is $83MM. This seems pretty fair to me. The good news is that punitive damages haven't been awarded yet. Hoping that the cost for hurt feelings rises north of $100M. Looking forward to suing everyone who said false statements about me in public. It's going to be an incredible payday, and I can parlay the winnings into running a drug operation and killing rural Americans with opioids and only pay a rounding error for everyone I murder. Can't wait. Edit: Apologies, HackerNews, are my numbers off? Am I factually incorrect? Are we seriously supporting the position that the Allies should have just hit Hitler with a $45B fine for the whole "Holocaust Thing" and called it even? I know addressing downvotes is frowned upon, but I'm genuinely curious why HN thinks feelings are worth eleven thousand times more than lives. Edit 2: Understood. Feelings really are worth four orders of magnitude more than lives, on this forum. Got it.

CodeSgt 4y ago
I agree with you and upvoted you, but your choice of language was a bit strong and bordered on inflammatory. That could explain the downvotes I think.
Izkata 4y ago
I suspect your post is sarcasm, but you didn't include any markers and I've seen this argument in earnest enough times that I can't just assume it is sarcasm.