Alex Jones: A Sloppy, Disrespectful Mess

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Alex Jones: A Sloppy, Disrespectful Mess

Volmarias: Dec 31, 2002; EMAIL... THE INTERNET... SEARCH ENGINES...

Saltpowered posted:

The judge cannot disbar them. The judge can refer them to the ethics board for that.

Sanctionwise for damage could be a wide range of things from several thousand slap on the wrist to they have to pay the estate back for large amounts of money. Sanctions amounts are often a crapshoot.

Given the amount of work they didn't do, that doesn't seem like much of a consequence.

Thanks for the answer though, even if it's less than heartening.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 14:43

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 10:42

Stefan Prodan: Jan 7, 2002; I deeply respect you as a human being... Some day I'm gonna make you *Mrs* Buck Turgidson!; Grimey Drawer

Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:

it's not mentioned in the decision but Karagounis was also pro se

lol that does seem pretty easily distinguishing!!

# ? Apr 6, 2023 14:47

Mr. Nice!: Oct 13, 2005; bone shaking.
soul baking.

I actually pulled up the case. It doesn't say what Martin claims. It's a different procedural posture. In fact, the case itself seems to pretty clearly state that a lawyer is in trouble if they know what they're filing is baseless.

quote:

Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 13 dictates that in signing a pleading, motion, or other paper, counsel certifies that he read the document and that the allegations contained in it are, to the best of his knowledge, neither 1) groundless and brought in bad faith or 2) groundless and brought for the purposes of harassment. Monroe v. Grider, 884 S.W.2d at 817; McCain v. NME Hosp., Inc., 856 S.W.2d 751, 757 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1993, no writ). This rule serves to "check abuses in the pleading process, i.e. to insure that at the time the challenged pleading was filed the litigant's position was factually well grounded and legally tenable." Home Owners Funding Corp. v. Scheppler, 815 S.W.2d 884, 889 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 1991, no writ). In other words, what Rule 13 regulates is the signing and filing of groundless pleadings in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, not the pursuit of an [**8] action later determined to be groundless after pleadings were filed. As much is revealed in the rule itself when it declares that "if a pleading, motion or other paper is signed in violation of this rule, the court . . . shall impose an appropriate sanction . . . ." TEX. R. CIV. P. 13 (emphasis added). It says nothing about levying sanctions if one pursues an action or pleading thought legitimate when filed but subsequently found baseless. As a result, the circumstances pivotal to the determination of whether sanctions should issue are those in existence at the time the pleading in question was signed and filed. Monroe v. Grider, 884 S.W.2d at 817; Campos v. Ysleta Gen. Hosp., Inc., 879 S.W.2d 67, 71 (Tex. App.--El Paso 1994, writ denied); McCain v. NME Hosp., Inc., 856 S.W.2d at 757; Home Owners Funding Corp. v. Scheppler, 815 S.W.2d at 889.

Next, since it is presumed that counsel acted in good faith, TEX. R. CIV. P. 13, the burden lies with the movant to prove the criteria prerequisite to recovering sanctions. GTE Communications Sys. Corp. v. Tanner, 856 S.W.2d 725, 729 (Tex. 1993); Campos v. [*765] Ysleta Gen. Hosp., Inc., 879 S.W.2d at 71. That is, [**9] it must establish not only the frivolity of its opponent's claim but also the improper motives underlying the decision to file the suit, motion, or document. This in turn makes it imperative for the trial court to convene and conduct an evidentiary hearing. Bisby v. Dow Chemical Co., 931 S.W.2d 18, 21 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1996, no writ); McCain v. NME Hosp., Inc., 856 S.W.2d at 757-58; see TEX. R. CIV. P. 13 (stating that the court must provide the litigants "notice and hearing"). "Without hearing evidence on the circumstances surrounding the filing of the pleading and the signer's credibility and motives, the trial court has no evidence to determine that the appellants or their attorneys filed the pleading in bad faith or to harass." McCain v. NME Hosp., Inc., 856 S.W.2d at 757-58; accord Bisby v. Dow Chemical Co., 931 S.W.2d at 21 (stating the same). Similarly, it is equally imperative that notice of the foregoing hearing be afforded the parties. TEX. R. CIV. P. 13. If one or the other is denied to the litigant against whom sanctions are sought, then it can hardly be said that the litigant received due process before being punished.

It seems like that would absolutely allow for sanctions in the present case because the motion for new trial was filed in bad faith with outright fabrications that could be shown by trivial evaluation of the docket.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 16:58

pseudanonymous: Aug 30, 2008; When you make the second entry and the debits and credits balance, and you blow them to hell.

Mr. Nice! posted:

It seems like that would absolutely allow for sanctions in the present case because the motion for new trial was filed in bad faith with outright fabrications that could be shown by trivial evaluation of the docket.

But a lawyer of his standing filed it.

It's weird how Jones and Trump seem to have this field of negative competency that affects lawyers. I know it's probably just because they can't get a competent lawyer, but it also seems like formerly competent people just become incompetent around them. I'm sure it's that they won't listen to the attorney and just demand they do this or that but it still seems kind of strange to me.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 18:15

Baron von Eevl: Jan 24, 2005; WHITE NOISE
GENERATOR
🔊😴

I think it's probably a combination of both. A terrible lawyer might be able to skate by with reasonable clients, and a competent lawyer might say no to unreasonable demands, but when the incompetent lawyer follows through with the unreasonable demands poo poo gets wild.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 19:10

InsertPotPun: Apr 16, 2018; Pissy Bitch stan

my guess would be that lawyers are only as good as the people under them and they get greedy and refuse to hire the good people so they can keep more money and this happens

# ? Apr 6, 2023 19:14

Piell: Sep 3, 2006; Grey Worm's Ken doll-like groin throbbed with the anticipatory pleasure that only a slightly warm and moist piece of lemoncake could offer; Young Orc

Welp, seems like no video
https://mobile.twitter.com/speechwrs/status/1644052452809777153

Piell fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Apr 6, 2023

# ? Apr 6, 2023 20:01

Wiggly Wayne DDS: Sep 11, 2010

yeah we only had a feed yesterday as bankston's clients requested one to view remotely but the court's open for anyone

real shame as we'll miss the minutae of reynal and martin's legal attempts, but we should get a good enough summary from that account they handled yesterday fine

# ? Apr 6, 2023 20:10

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

pseudanonymous posted:

But a lawyer of his standing filed it.

It's weird how Jones and Trump seem to have this field of negative competency that affects lawyers. I know it's probably just because they can't get a competent lawyer, but it also seems like formerly competent people just become incompetent around them. I'm sure it's that they won't listen to the attorney and just demand they do this or that but it still seems kind of strange to me.

my guess is he (foolishly) relied on reynal for the facts rather than reviewing the record himself

# ? Apr 6, 2023 20:10

Wiggly Wayne DDS: Sep 11, 2010

evilweasel posted:

my guess is he (foolishly) relied on reynal for the facts rather than reviewing the record himself

yesterday reynal and martin did keep pointing at other lawyers' notes or opinions as what they built on rather than reading the record at all

# ? Apr 6, 2023 20:15

Wiggly Wayne DDS: Sep 11, 2010

rather than embedding every tweet and breaking the thread here's speechwrs account from inside the courtroom today, hashtags trimmed:

speechwrs posted:

Waiting for the court reporter to walk through the door. And here she is. Judge will be on the bench in a few minutes.
This part of the sanctions hearing today is testimony on attorney's fees.
Nothing on Youtube today. So this is the place.
Bankston giving a few minutes of background. Legal standards -- contemporaneous records mostly, some reconstruction, daily tasks.
Bankston tries to pre-empt argument that there should be no sanctions at all because plaintiffs' firm taken on a contingent fee. Not a bar to a recovery.

The law of LPBH -- Recent case. Judge awarded fees and appeals court possible fees. Law as currently stands is you have to estimate fees and award the estimated fees before the appeal rather than after the appeal and you have actual costs.
Amounts requested. 68,200, $10,450, $31,000, $8,956.06. Second fees for Feb 2023 motion -- 42,500, $6,600, $3,300, Powerpoint $12,925. Travel $6,600.
For appellate fees requesting today, stairsteps up from appellate court to Texas Supreme Court. Basically, $44,000 for appellate court.
Now an opening from an attorney representing Reynal on Plaintiffs' Request for Fees.
Claims: request does not correspond to court's order. portions that do correspond contains non-recoverable fee claims. contains non-recoverable expense claims.

Also claiming some fee documents filed late.
I >>think<< the judge just signaled she is not going to award sanctions on yesterday's Motion for New Trial. Will see.
Bankston now on the stand testifying to his fees, notes, firm records, etc.
In proving up fees, says the legal issues are watershed. Also collateral issues dealing with litigation issues.
In terms of this case, lots of national light. Nature of defendant completely different. Damages models are different. You understand if you mess up, it could be devastating for your career.

This has been an enormous time suck. Cites bankruptcy that never should have happened.
Notes there have been nine appeals so far in this case.
Speaks to uncertainty of collection higher than usual. Plaintiffs have no real compensation on the horizon. Even sanctions previously awarded trying to be clawed back in bankruptcy.
No economic damages and an 8 figure verdict. I (Bankston) don't know of another one. Said his clients very satisfied with the outcome.
Bankston placed hourly worth of his reasonable value and his partners at $550 an hour.

Other attorneys he's talked to would have charged higher than $550. Notes attorney who won a $70 million verdict in an earplugs case. That attorney said $750 an hour would be reasonable.
Said has already been awarded $550 by this court and court of appeals in this case in previous hearings.
Notes Reynal is already getting $800 an hour in this case and the $800 an hour has been confirmed by the bankruptcy court.
Avi Moshenberg is the attorney questioning Bankston. He is a bankruptcy attorney who jumped into case when first bankruptcy was filed in April 2022. Usual fee $500 an hour, Bankston thanks him for only charging $400 an hour.
Most of this fee testimony relates to what the plaintiffs' legal team did before the first April trial that was stopped by the bankruptcy. Basically, payment for the work that was wasted when bankruptcy filed.

Minor sidebar -- this will be one of the last trial court hearings on this case. It's now been appealed up to the Texas court of appeals, so that court takes over now going forward.
Notes 65 slide Powerpoint took much longer than 12 hours he is asking for, but also notes only billed 12 because he as a special affinity for this case that borders on the obsessive.
Since Bankston already did nine appeals in this case and most appeals are sort of the same. For hours, "anyone who tells you you can do a brief in less than two weeks isn't doing a complete brief." So billed 80 hours for each one.
Bankston gives shout out to Westlaw. Because, Westlaw.
Lots of testimony on inside workings of preparing and filing appellate briefs. Now on to Texas Supreme Court.

Says you have to prepare at least three days for any Texas Supreme Court date. A lion's den. They will ask serious questions. Has seen attorneys lose credibility on case law queries. Not facts of the case, but law applied to facts.
Now up with cross on Bankston.
Question on invoices from other firms. Proving up bills. Beatty bill has been paid. Moshenberg being nice about not bugging him on payment.
Trying to show Bankston does not have a lot of contemporaneous records for legal services. Trying to show he does not have a time record at his office as a regular practice. Bankston agrees.
Now trying to cut back on the total sanctions. Hasn't made a claim yet for a zero line sanctions amount.

Bankston says he actually messed up on actual November 22 hearing and did not include it, but "a card laid is a card played."
Judge: Confused about dividing the expenses in bankruptcy in thirds because same amount of work on three state cases? Bankston -- feels overly aggressive to do that.
Judge: feels Heslin plaintiffs suffered more. Other plaintiffs did not have trial setting wiped out.
Judge: So what were other expenses if you separate out the three cases? Bankston: not really.
Reynal attorney trying to dig out the contingent fee agreement. Judge: this is a sanctions hearing. I am free to come up with what is an appropriate sanction. The contract is not relevant to my decision.

Judge to Reynal attorney: I am not happy with what happened in the bankruptcy filing and what happened in trial. She hopes he is not asking her if she intends to follow the law.
Judge: while I am not sanctioning you for the Motion for New Trial, I found it "sloppy, disingenuous, and in large part a waste of time."
20 minute break.

Wiggly Wayne DDS fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Apr 6, 2023

# ? Apr 6, 2023 21:31

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

Sp could someone more fluent in legalese summarize what's been said so far in that Twitter? I think I understand most of it, but want to make sure.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 21:40

Saltpowered: Apr 12, 2010; Chief Executive Officer
Awful Industries, LLC

Pity that they aren�t getting sanctions for the motion for a new trial. They�ll still get stuck with attorneys fees for Bankston and some other sanctions but no real monetary consequences. Hopefully they�ll get some sort of Ethics referral.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 21:48

Wiggly Wayne DDS: Sep 11, 2010

continuing on from speechwrs account from inside the courtroom today, hashtags trimmed:

speechwrs posted:

Court reporter is back. Judge back. Plaintiffs' bankruptcy attorney on the stand.
Bankruptcy attorney notes Jones first case was dismissed.
Now explaining why Bankston was necessary and important to the bankruptcy case because he had so much knowledge about the entire case. Ton of work in short amount of time. "Drinking from a firehose."
Regarding his $400 an hour rate, testifies this is on the low end of what you can get for bankruptcy work.
Judge: if bankruptcy atty had to assign a percentage just to Heslin case, work there was 95% Heslin (of the three cases).

Now up another attorney. Holly Davis. Family and trial law. Baylor law grad. 16 years. As part of running firms, heavily involved in invoicing attorneys.
Lots of trial experience, also lots of trial consulting work. Says trial work can work in many areas of the law. Family lawyers in court more than other attorneys on average.
Her work concentrates on family cases that also involve businesses. So it is a case within a case. She is a big trial strategy person.
She has also been a commentator for Court TV and Law & Crime on George Floyd case, Depp defamation case, other high profile jury trials.
Testifies work Bankston's firm performed very reasonable and necessary. Also says $550 an hour for pretrial services is very reasonable and on the low end. Other attorneys $600 to $700 an hour.

Reynal attorney proves up that Bankston did not have contemporaneous timeslips.
No other witnesses.
Closing -- Bankston thanks judge for all the work on the case.
Butler Snow attorney for Reynal goes back to original Powerpoint. Goes back through some previously plowed ground. Now focusing on fee evidence he claims does not relate to the judge's particular order about what the hearing was supposed to be about.
He is saying Bankston firm using old case law for figuring fees, and case called Rohrmoos case is now the standard.

Says Rohrmoos clarified the law in 2019. States Bankston firm estimates lack specificity and did not meet the burden of providing sufficient evidence.
He says invoices are the type of records that can support an award of attorney's fees. As for everything else, he claims case requires "contemporaneous billing records" or other documentation recorded reasonably close to the time when the work is performed.
This is why he was so insistent on contemporaneous vs. reconstructed hours. Says have to have billing records with specifics. He is arguing work (other than invoice amounts by other firms) does not meet test. Just not enough detail.
Request no amount of sanctions be awarded, but if they are, put forward consistent with the law.
Judge: says I was there. Is he saying she can't rely on what she saw? Are you arguing since I was there and I saw the product, are you saying I cannot consider that? Atty says yes, she can't do that.
Judge: Anything else needed on this case, will send on paper.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 22:59

goatface: Dec 5, 2007; I had a video of that when I was about 6.

I remember it being shit.; Grimey Drawer

Them arguing "lack of specific detail" is pretty funny.

# ? Apr 6, 2023 23:53

Guineapig: Sep 8, 2005; Louder is not Better

Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:

continuing on from speechwrs account from inside the courtroom today, hashtags trimmed:

Thanks for posting all this. Very interesting.

# ? Apr 7, 2023 01:55

Piell: Sep 3, 2006; Grey Worm's Ken doll-like groin throbbed with the anticipatory pleasure that only a slightly warm and moist piece of lemoncake could offer; Young Orc

https://twitter.com/MoString/status/1644440362205757440

Alex Jones's Attorneys Filed a Hot Mess of a Motion but No New Sanctions Awarded

Piell fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Apr 7, 2023

# ? Apr 7, 2023 21:42

Volmarias: Dec 31, 2002; EMAIL... THE INTERNET... SEARCH ENGINES...

Alas, I do not subscribe to Hot Dockets, so I cannot read this

# ? Apr 8, 2023 03:31

Foo Diddley: Oct 29, 2011; cat

p boss name for a legal blog, tho

# ? Apr 8, 2023 03:39

Slyphic: Oct 12, 2021; All we do is walk around believing birds!

When does any part of this farce wind up before a judge with a god damned backbone?

# ? Apr 8, 2023 04:22

Borscht: Jun 4, 2011

I feel weird copy pasting from here but I think it's ok to say Morgan stringer content is now free.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MoString/status/1645533201367023618

# ? Apr 10, 2023 23:02

Volmarias: Dec 31, 2002; EMAIL... THE INTERNET... SEARCH ENGINES...

For the lazy of us, https://morganstringer.substack.com/p/alex-joness-attorneys-filed-a-hot

The most relevant portion for me:

quote:

I believe that Judge Guerra-Gamble did not order sanctions here because these motions for a new trial are routine, and she did not want to give anyone the chance to say that she was too harsh on the Defendants in the Heslin v. Jones case. However, she was not pleased.

Volmarias fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Apr 10, 2023

# ? Apr 10, 2023 23:10

mojo1701a: Oct 9, 2008; Oh, yeah. Loud and clear. Emphasis on LOUD!
~ David Lee Roth

I forgot about the genesis of Lord Gribble Pibble of the Scribble Scrabble.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 03:06

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

Volmarias posted:

For the lazy of us, https://morganstringer.substack.com/p/alex-joness-attorneys-filed-a-hot

The most relevant portion for me:

Can I just ask what the hell it actually takes for the judges to put their foot down? The judges in Alex Jones' cases kept treating him with kid gloves so they "couldn't be accused of being mean to him" despite all the bullshit he kept doing and saying about them, the defendants in this case files what amounted to 60 pages of pure nonsense and outright lies, as actual lawyers. It's just infuriating how they've turned the entire legal system into an outright joke at this point.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 05:57

The Lone Badger: Sep 24, 2007

Randalor posted:

Can I just ask what the hell it actually takes for the judges to put their foot down? The judges in Alex Jones' cases kept treating him with kid gloves so they "couldn't be accused of being mean to him" despite all the bullshit he kept doing and saying about them, the defendants in this case files what amounted to 60 pages of pure nonsense and outright lies, as actual lawyers. It's just infuriating how they've turned the entire legal system into an outright joke at this point.

('Always has been' meme goes here)

# ? Apr 11, 2023 06:00

Sentient Data: Aug 31, 2011; My molecule scrambler ray will disintegrate your armor with one blow!

Think of it like a game, the judge is taking a minor amount of damage to be in a better position to deal a major blow

The rougher the judge is, the more angles there are for appeals and complaints and whatnot. They're trying to be impossibly forgiving to make the legal nukes as appeal-proof as possible

# ? Apr 11, 2023 06:02

Malachite_Dragon: Mar 31, 2010; Weaving Merry Christmas magic

The Pop Team Epic "Your motherfucking life ends [x amount of time] from now" meme except that time never loving arrives because they never actually punish them for their bullshit.

I lust for Alex Jones and his lawyers to be destitute and living beneath bridges.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 06:06

sugar free jazz: Mar 5, 2008

Sentient Data posted:

Think of it like a game, the judge is taking a minor amount of damage to be in a better position to deal a major blow

The rougher the judge is, the more angles there are for appeals and complaints and whatnot. They're trying to be impossibly forgiving to make the legal nukes as appeal-proof as possible

lol

# ? Apr 11, 2023 06:23

Xakura: Jan 10, 2019; A safety-conscious little mouse!

The punishment is losing.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 12:02

bird food bathtub: Aug 9, 2003; College Slice

Sentient Data posted:

Think of it like a game, the judge is taking a minor amount of damage to be in a better position to deal a major blow

The rougher the judge is, the more angles there are for appeals and complaints and whatnot. They're trying to be impossibly forgiving to make the legal nukes as appeal-proof as possible

The anger comes from Jones getting this kid gloves "we have to be careful he can afford to fight back" treatment while a normal person gets told to go gently caress themselves right out of the gate, is then brutalized by the system the entire way through, suffering punishments and losses every step of the way whether innocent or not even if they fully comply.

When a normal person hears five to six figure fines and ten times that in lawyer fees they're hosed right from the start and never even get to have this kind of "fair" treatment. They're just hosed. Meanwhile Jones gets to be a colossal belligerent rear end in a top hat for years and suffer no meaningful change in his standard of living. (And honestly probably none afterwards either.) Tell this "the Judge is charging up their spirit bomb" poo poo to a person who loses their job and then home to pre-trial detention on suspicion of driving while black before hearing "Oops wrong person."

# ? Apr 11, 2023 12:41

Papa Was A Video Toaster: Jan 9, 2011

I'm not disagreeing, but Jones isn't in criminal court for any of these cases IIRC. They don't have the power to jail him.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 12:44

univbee: Jun 3, 2004

Yeah. It sucks, but there are historical cases where a judge let their mask slip a teeny tiny bit and then the person was able to (at least eventually) overturn their harsh punishment.

I mentioned Jim Bakker before and his case is actually a good example of this. From Wikipedia:

quote:

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld Bakker's conviction on the fraud and conspiracy charges, voided Bakker's 45-year sentence and $500,000 fine and ordered a new sentencing hearing in February 1991.[50] The court ruled that Potter's sentencing statement about Bakker, that "those of us who do have a religion are sick of being saps for money-grubbing preachers and priests",[51] was evidence that the judge had injected his religious beliefs into Bakker's sentence.[50]

A sentence-reduction hearing was held on November 16, 1992, and Bakker's sentence was reduced to eight years. In August 1993, he was transferred to a minimum-security federal prison in Jesup, Georgia. Bakker was paroled in July 1994, after serving almost five years of his sentence.[52] His son, Jay, spearheaded a letter-writing campaign to the parole board advocating leniency.[53] Celebrity lawyer Alan Dershowitz acted as Bakker's parole attorney, having said that he "would guarantee that Mr. Bakker would never again engage in the blend of religion and commerce that led to his conviction."[54] Bakker was released from Federal Bureau of Prisons custody on December 1, 1994,[55] owing $6 million to the IRS.[56]

If it hadn't been for that statement he might still be rotting away in jail instead of out doing almost exactly what got him put in jail in the first place, and richer than anyone in this thread is. It's undeniably stupid as hell, but this kind of thing is exactly what they're trying to avoid, and unfortunately that does mean different treatment for someone who's perceived to have means and legal resources at their disposal (they're more likely to treat poorer defendants like poo poo because they don't have the resources to hire lawyers who'll do the legwork required, because getting this kind of stuff overturned does require a ton of legal work and a lot of money as a result).

# ? Apr 11, 2023 12:54

Baron von Eevl: Jan 24, 2005; WHITE NOISE
GENERATOR
🔊😴

Jones owes more than a billion with a b dollars, far more than he'll ever earn. He's also been publicly embarrassed which may not seem like it's impacting him but it's probably making him feel extra lovely all the time. He's not a happy man and he probably never will be again. On top of that he's also very stupid and the longer this goes on the more likely it becomes that he'll do something unquestionably get-thrown-in-jail illegal like shooting at someone or something.

Right now one of his lovely lawyers is getting publicly humiliated (which is going to be a bigger deal to him than Jones, since people have to want to hire him) and is probably going to eat a fine that wouldn't be much to Jones but is very much going to hurt for a lawyer who is suddenly struggling to get clients.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 13:01

Pirate Radar: Apr 18, 2008; You're not my Ruthie!
You're not my Debbie!
You're not my Sherry!

Jones is better off than some people (even just looking at civil court) because he can afford representation even if his representation is a bunch of stupid assholes. I�m not an expert but I�m pretty sure even they�re still better than nothing.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 13:11

stringless: Dec 28, 2005; keyboard ⌨️ cowboy

univbee posted:

quote:
Celebrity lawyer Alan Dershowitz acted as Bakker's parole attorney,

MOTHERFUCKER

guess who was recently a guest on Alex's show

# ? Apr 11, 2023 13:16

FoolyCharged: Oct 11, 2012; Cheating at a raffle? I sentence you to 1 year in jail! No! Two years! Three! Four! Five years! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah!
Somebody call for an ant?

Pirate Radar posted:

Jones is better off than some people (even just looking at civil court) because he can afford representation even if his representation is a bunch of stupid assholes. I’m not an expert but I’m pretty sure even they’re still better than nothing.

I dunno. Nothing wouldn't email opposing council all the evidence you were hiding from them

# ? Apr 11, 2023 13:48

Pirate Radar: Apr 18, 2008; You're not my Ruthie!
You're not my Debbie!
You're not my Sherry!

I deliberated for a while before posting that because they�re pretty bad but he would more likely than not still have done worse if he represented himself, and he always has the option of blaming the loss on them for being bad lawyers.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 13:51

Outrail: Jan 4, 2009; www.sapphicrobotica.com

Papa Was A Video Toaster posted:

I'm not disagreeing, but Jones isn't in criminal court for any of these cases IIRC. They don't have the power to jail him.

Still wild that what he did to Sandy Hook parents isn't illegal

# ? Apr 11, 2023 14:01

duz: Jul 11, 2005; Come on Ilhan, lets go bag us a shitpost

Outrail posted:

Still wild that what he did to Sandy Hook parents isn't illegal

Now you know why the one father started a company that files DMCA takedown notices to get conspiracy videos delisted. It's the only thing that actually works since only companies and their rights matter anymore.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 17:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 31, 2024 10:42

kw0134: Apr 19, 2003; I buy feet pics🍆

Outrail posted:

Still wild that what he did to Sandy Hook parents isn't illegal

We don't have criminal libel laws for a reason (being that it ends up being abusive for those that have power to shut down discourse they don't like.) Hell, we already have problems with civil suits shutting down dissenting voices, anti-SLAPP laws aren't everywhere. We can have a good discussion on what free speech means in an era of mass communication that allows for stochastic terrorism, but in the context of the stance of first amendment rights in this country it's going to be a very tiny needle's eye you need to thread.

# ? Apr 11, 2023 17:30

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Alex Jones: A Sloppy, Disrespectful Mess

«‹›365 »