- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Looking back at the Alex Jones trial.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
This isn't a discussion about what anyone believes is an appropriate amount to be awarded by the jury
Who said it was? It certainly wasn't me.
Keep dodging addressing your absolutism though.
1
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:23 pm to Indefatigable
What harm was done?
2nd time i have asked
2nd time i have asked
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:23 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Who said it was?
The idiot I replied to before you decided to tag along.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:25 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
What harm was done?
And I have answered, twice. The families showed at trial that they were harassed, forced to move, threatened, etc., as a result of Jones' purposeful nonsense.
If your only point is that those things aren't harm, then all there is to say is that the law disagrees with you.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:28 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Correct.
So again by definition and with proof free speech is not absolute as ruled by the supreme court. even though it has absolutely NOTHING to do with this entire discussion about Alex Jones being sued
quote:
- Freedom of speech does not include the right:
- To incite imminent lawless action.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
- To make or distribute obscene materials.
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
- To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
- To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
- Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).
US COURTS OWN WEBSITE
quote:
The right to free speech is not absolute. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government sometimes may be allowed to limit speech. Historically, a fundamental distinction arose between the content of speech and the means whereby that speech is expressed.
LINK
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:29 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
The families showed at trial that they were harassed, forced to move, threatened, etc., as a result of Jones' purposeful nonsense.
So Jones didnt "harm" them
Thank you
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:30 pm to Byron Bojangles III
quote:
So again by definition and with proof free speech is not absolute as ruled by the supreme court.
A convoluted judiciary still won't save you.
Me: Speech isn't free speech if the government controls it.
You: Speech is free speech even when the government controls it.
Me: Says who?
You: The government.
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:31 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
So Jones didnt "harm" them
Quite the opposite in fact. He did harm them, and they proved it in court.
Again, is your only point that harassment, IIED, and the other things are not "harm"? Its bizarre considering that those things do constitute harm in every jurisdiction in the United States.
Should we not have defamation or libel laws at all?
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:32 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
He did harm them,
How did he personally "harm" them?
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:32 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
A convoluted judiciary still won't save you.
There is nothing convoluted whatsoever about SCOTUS' first amendment jurisprudence.
quote:
Me: Speech isn't free speech if the government controls it.
You: Speech is free speech even when the government controls it.
Me: Says who?
You: The government.
Ah, so yes. You are hiding your unsupportable absolutist view behind feigned semantical arguments.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:32 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
So Jones didnt "harm" them
Thank you
gonna keep posting it until y'all learn what the definitions are you'll get it one day
by Jones using his platform to spread lies about these families it caused them to be harrassed.
quote:
Defamation refers to the act of making false statements about someone that damages their reputation. It can be spoken (slander) or written (libel). For a statement to be considered defamation, it must be false, communicated to others, and result in harm to the individual's reputation. There are laws in place to protect individuals from defamation, and legal action can be taken against those who engage in it.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:32 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
How did he personally "harm" them?
In what ways have my prior answers not solved this riddle for you?
One does not have to physically hit someone else to "harm" them.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:33 pm to Byron Bojangles III
quote:
by Jones using his platform to spread lies about these families it caused them to be harrassed.
thank you. So lunatics "harned" them not him personally Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:34 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
There is nothing convoluted whatsoever about SCOTUS' first amendment jurisprudence.
bullshite.
I'm also not sure why you'd stop at the top layer.
quote:
Ah, so yes. You are hiding your unsupportable absolutist view behind feigned semantical arguments.
You're so desperate for this to be true. Your arse couldn't even get the basic facts straight without pressure.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:35 pm to TTOWN RONMON
quote:
Alex Jones has got 100 x more brains than you or any liberal EVER WILL, this guy has been reading since he was 8 and has a photographic memory. He reads all those Gov. Docs they think no one will ever read. Is he a SHOWMAN? Yes, and he's good at it, if that's what you like, not my style per se, but you sit there and lament how he hurt those Conn. Yankees and their kids with his showmanship and I say BULL CRAP Mr. Handman, what about all these Liberals BS Lies about Climate Change to our kids? What about them not only indoctrinating kids into the TRANS MOVEMENT but then allowing them to get surgeries behind the parents backs? And lastly what about all their LIES about COVID 19 that killed millions of people? And them funding these GAIN of FUNCTION Frankenstein tests? And you have the audacity to talk about Alex Jones. GET OUT All you libs are the same, you hate God and have no moral guide, but you think your own moral guide is great, but the fact is all you libs are just like Hitler in the end, you have zero understandings about reality. You all love Socialism, which has NEVER WORKED and never will.
JFC it’s like you had chatGPT watch Fox News for an hour then write a report. There’s not an original thought in your entire rant. Just the same dumb made up crap that you’re regurgitating from whatever media you watch.
Also thank you for proving my point. My entire point is that MAGA thinks the families of sandy hook being awarded money is worse than what Alex Jones did.
Can you tell me where in the Bible it says that it’s OK to harass families of school shooting victims?
You know who else harassed families of murder victims? Hitler.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:35 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
So lunatics "harned" them not him personally
Well, the IIED claims stuck against Jones personally, so no. Some of the harm was done by Jones directly, and not only by the lunatics that he incited for years with knowingly false information.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:36 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
You're so desperate for this to be true. Your arse couldn't even get the basic facts straight without pressure.
You consistently refuse to actually state your beliefs on any relevant topic, so you'll have to live with the inferences I draw from your deflections and emojis.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:36 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
done by Jones directly,
What did he do directly that harmed them?
He was harrassing them? Following them around?
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:37 pm to SDVTiger
quote:those "lunatics" such as TTOWN RONMON are influenced by Jones and his lies. without those said lies they wouldn't be influenced.
thank you. So lunatics "harned" them not him personally
it's all very simple and you're ignoring all the facts
Posted on 6/4/24 at 4:39 pm to SDVTiger
quote:
What did he do directly that harmed them?
He was harrassing them? Following them around?
Once again, intentional infliction of emotional distress is a tort, and Jones was found liable for it. So is defamation. In one of the cases, Jones didn't even raise a defense to the claims that he harmed the plaintiffs, and got slapped with a default judgment. Go read the transcripts if you want the particulars. Separate juries in separate states found for the plaintiff families.
Again, if your only position is that words cannot cause harm or that Jones should not be held responsible for actions he incited, then just say so and lets quit the merry go round.
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 4:40 pm
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News