|
IANAL as well, but it's a civil case. Doesn't that mean that he can be compelled to testify, unlike in a criminal case?
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:10 |
|
|
THE RULE does not apply to parties. In civil cases you can be compelled to testify. He can still take advantage of 5th Amendment protection against criminal self incrimination on individual questions.
Chef Boyardeez Nuts fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Jul 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:20
|
|
|
This was posted in another thread. So credit to whoever did so. 10/10 meltdown. https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1552808949535178752
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:31
|
|
|
teen witch posted:Iirc the plaintiff’s counsel is doing this pro bono Its not pro bono, but they front the money to the clients for the trial expenses. The only way they get paid is if they win the suit, they get a cut. So the plaintiffs are going to go bankrupt trying to fight the case at first, but the lawyers do eventually get paid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:33
|
|
|
Okay so non-lawyer galaxy brain spitballing time, how does this work: if you get compelled to testify in a civil case, and you just go up there and take the 5th in response to every question, can the court do anything about that or are they supposed to respect that? If Jones takes the 5th in response to a question where the answer couldn't possibly implicate him in an actual crime, is that perjury? Or do they just accept it because they can't prove he didn't commit a crime?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:35
|
|
|
Your Gay Uncle posted:Its not pro bono, but they front the money to the clients for the trial expenses. The only way they get paid is if they win the suit, they get a cut. I'm sure Mark said on Knowledge Fight that the penalties that Alex has had to pay for InfoWars loving around have already covered all of the legal expenses and then some, too
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:39
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:Okay so non-lawyer galaxy brain spitballing time, how does this work: if you get compelled to testify in a civil case, and you just go up there and take the 5th in response to every question, can the court do anything about that or are they supposed to respect that? If Jones takes the 5th in response to a question where the answer couldn't possibly implicate him in an actual crime, is that perjury? Or do they just accept it because they can't prove he didn't commit a crime? I don't know the rules well enough to explain it but I think you're on the right track. The 5th isn't just a magic "I don't have to answer anything I don't want to" button. There is more to it. I wish I could give any details whatsoever but I'm just going off what I remember from episodes of the Opening Arguments podcast I had on while doing something else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:41
|
|
|
The Fifth is an incredibly broad protection because it protects you from confessing to details of crimes both unknown and known. Courts are really limited as to how far they can pry into the declaration because otherwise the protection would be ornamental. That said, you're telling the jury "I am not answering your question because it would implicate me in a crime." It's not exactly endearing to a fact finder. In criminal trials you get a jury instruction that says "don't hold the dude taking his fifth amendment rights against him" but that is not true in a civil case. So short answer: you can, but you're shooting yourself in the dick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:51
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:This was posted in another thread. So credit to whoever did so. Is he trying to do an impression of the announcer guy from Rome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:51
|
|
|
If I were Jones' attorney I'd be preparing him to bend over and grab his ankles. The best thing he could do is be polite, circumspect, and soft spoken when under examination. Take the blame "for trusting people the wrong people" and emphasize at every opportunity that your business employees good people that shouldn't suffer for your mistakes. It probably wouldn't work, mind you, but bombast isn't gonna lead to a good end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 07:01
|
|
|
Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:If I were Jones' attorney I'd be preparing him to bend over and grab his ankles. The best thing he could do is be polite, circumspect, and soft spoken when under examination. Take the blame "for trusting people the wrong people" and emphasize at every opportunity that your business employees good people that shouldn't suffer for your mistakes. If he tries that, what's his plan for when Mark stares him dead in the eyes and plays the clip from the deposition where he shouted that the jury needs to find out the truth behind Sandy Hook. I'm assuming Mark has that basically hot keyed, because c'mon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 07:03
|
|
|
Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:The Fifth is an incredibly broad protection because it protects you from confessing to details of crimes both unknown and known. Courts are really limited as to how far they can pry into the declaration because otherwise the protection would be ornamental. "in this case about whether or not you criminally said that no children had died at sandy hook did you say that no children died at sandy hook?" "i plead the fifth" *fifteen second trial fart* "ROLLING OBJECTION!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 07:13
|
|
|
Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:If I were Jones' attorney I'd be preparing him to bend over and grab his ankles. The best thing he could do is be polite, circumspect, and soft spoken when under examination. Take the blame "for trusting people the wrong people" and emphasize at every opportunity that your business employees good people that shouldn't suffer for your mistakes. If Alex Jones was the sort of man who was capable of doing this, even if every single lawyer yelled at him to do it, this trial would have never happened, because the incidents that caused it would have never happened. Alex is hopefully now akin to the apocryphal story of Empedocles proving he's a god by jumping into the volcano Etna.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 07:27
|
|
|
Still can't wrap my brain around how much money infowars makes. No wonder people are ok with ditching any sense of morality they might of had.
Confusedslight fucked around with this message at 07:40 on Jul 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 07:35
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Is he trying to do an impression of the announcer guy from Rome. You're so right https://youtu.be/xH0kO5qcPf8 The guild of millers uses only the finest grains. True Roman bread for true Romans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 08:16
|
|
Glory to Italia!
|
Confusedslight posted:Still can't wrap my brain around how much money infowars makes. No wonder people are ok with ditching any sense of morality they might of had. You really think those frog protein dick pills they sell actually cost 135 dollars a bottle to make? When you're selling snake oil to idiots you don't even have to really sell them anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 08:44
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Since The RULE!!! says witnesses can't be in the room while others are testifying, and Alex was there, I presume that means Alex will not be taking the stand at any point Answered already, but parties to the case are not bound by the witness exclusion rule. Also it is funny that rule is just called the rule in every American jurisdiction I know of. E: it also does not apply to expert witnesses. Mr. Nice! fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Jul 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 08:45
|
|
|
ILL Machina posted:You're so right Grain force plus
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 08:46
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:This was posted in another thread. So credit to whoever did so. This is just run-of-the-mill fake outrage. Boring as poo poo really.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:05
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Is he trying to do an impression of the announcer guy from Rome. The whole hand gesture thing whilst orating was highly formalised in Rome. If you studied rhetoric you were taught the correct gestures and when to use them in a precise way with defined meanings and customary usage etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:11
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:This was posted in another thread. So credit to whoever did so. This is all I can hear and see watching this: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:21
|
|
|
0konner posted:Grain force plus  Each bucket's a bargain at only twenty denarii!
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:40
|
|
|
Some kind goons suggested Knowledge Fight podcast for a summary of what's going on, and I'm not sure if anyone already posted it but Opening Arguments has a brand new AJ trial episode as well. Check out the URL lol. https://openargs.com/oa617-alex-jones-lawyers-have-no-fcking-idea-what-theyre-doing/ The host is an actual lawyer, if someone isn't familiar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 10:22
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:This was posted in another thread. So credit to whoever did so. TW edit:hell fuckin yeah ministry rules Somebody fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Jul 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 10:26
|
|
|
same kinda aesthetic too. you know it's not coincidence that steven spielberg filmed that scene like the nazi rally from indiana jones and the last crusade. like really intense, convulsive anger combined with futurism and a "life is for living" philosophy to reclaim one's destiny as a RACE... the human race in this case
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 10:33
|
|
|
Just watched the Owen Troyer bit. What a waste of 90 minutes and I doubt the jury found that tone particularly useful either. His refusal to outright say that he is sorry for adding to the conspiracy is infuriating and would have cost him nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 10:58
|
|
|
When do we go live today?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 14:21
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:This was posted in another thread. So credit to whoever did so. its like hes talking directly to me, this is what i rant about 24/7 too no you fat fool, humanity wont do any of these things.  but we can build a better race to do it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 14:25
|
|
|
Herbicidal Maniac posted:Just watched the Owen Troyer bit. What a waste of 90 minutes and I doubt the jury found that tone particularly useful either. He doesn't believe he added to it is the thing. He really thinks in his mind he did nothing wrong. I don't think the jury questions will be as brutal for him as they were for Darla, but I'm still interested to see.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 14:27
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:He doesn't believe he added to it is the thing. He really thinks in his mind he did nothing wrong. I don't think the jury questions will be as brutal for him as they were for Darla, but I'm still interested to see. I'm not sure Owen thinks much of anything. Also, 11 eastern for the start right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 14:51
|
|
|
Should be any minute now
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 14:58
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/YEXC_o6g3uk Looks like its starting
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:01
|
|
|
iwentdoodie posted:I'm not sure Owen thinks much of anything. nope now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEXC_o6g3uk
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:02
|
|
|
No Alex today?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:11
|
|
|
"Do you enjoy your job?" *pause* "I'm happy with what I'm doing"
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
So they are just giving him a Do Over on the whole trial? I thought it was done and this was to figure out how far to push his poo poo in. That should take about an hour and is for the judge. Jury goes away at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
They rehearsed this so much lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:15
|
|
|
lol we got a brief vignette on the firing of Rob Dew.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
Oh man, Owen saying that Infowars covered Epstein for "decades" before anyone cared is probably the favorite Alex Jones Was Right lie people trot out. Alex didn't care about Epstein until well after he was arrested the first time, but because he endlessly talked about Hollywood/Washington Sex Clubs he moved the goalposts and claimed he was talking about Epstein and the Lolita Express forever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:10 |
|
|
Noblesse Obliged posted:So they are just giving him a Do Over on the whole trial? I thought it was done and this was to figure out how far to push his poo poo in. That should take about an hour and is for the judge. Jury goes away at that point. No, he isn't getting a do over. They're establishing how much damages Jones owes the family. The defense is trying to humanize themselves to minimize the damages as much as possible. The plaintiffs are allowing the defense to go on like this during friendly cross because it opens the door for a lot of questions on re-direct such as putting the entire Megyn Kelly video in front of the jury.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 15:22
|
|