It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sandy Hook parents sue radio host Alex Jones for defamation

page: 6
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2018 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Phage

how would a court go about proving malicious intent?

sounds good though


A court doesn't prove ANYTHING. In trials there are 2 burdens of proof. The first is the burden of doing forward, by which the plaintiff must offer evidence that proves the case, assuming all that evidence is true. The second is called the risk if non-persuasion, which means the finder of fact (the jury in a jury trial) must believe the plaintiff by a preponderance of the evidence, which in most states is defined as the fact finder believing the plaintiff's claim is "more likely than not." In criminal cases the burden is higher. But in no case does the court need to prove any fact. The court has no burden of proof. The plaintiff usually does, although with what are called "affirmative defenses", the defendant has the ultimate burden.
Also malice ca be inferred and can be shown by showing a reckless disregard for the truth.
As a retired lawyer and judge, I'd much rather have the parent's side of this case. AJ is an arrogant A#####e who will antagonize a jury, particularly when compared to a parent who has lost a child. Jones says these despicable things to make money. The jury will want to make him pay. This is the perfect case for a runaway jury.
edit on 17-4-2018 by F4guy because: The wrong word in the wrong place




posted on Apr, 17 2018 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328




Good, he deserves it for pushing this idiotic and insulting crap and filling the stupid people of America's heads' with even more stupidity.



Please explain how one choice is more stupid
than the other? We only have two choices in
this fight. One says I believe what my leaders
and media have told me. As I have my whole
life. Convinced they have no reason or agenda
for deceit. They say it, I believe I have the truth.

The other choice isn't paranoid for being
a bit more cautious.When a rash of shootings
that can't fail to gain sympathy start jumping
off all over in a country where It's people are
legally armed? The choice is not to believe or
trust quite so willingly when good questions
are ignored.

And only one side clearly seeks to
reduce that number by half. IMO that's really
stupid sounding like communism, facism
maybe?
So I'm asking for a rational answer. Why is the
other choice of caution so stupid?
edit on Rpm41718v51201800000025 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2018 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254




Good. He's been making money off their pain and suffering. It's about time karma bit him in the ass.


No. He's been making money off real and fake news. They are being targeted by trolls, why don't they sue the trolls?



posted on Apr, 17 2018 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Well, now, this could get interesting!!! Since they are the ones filing the lawsuit, they also bear the burden of proof. That means they have to prove this really happened, just as was claimed, and that means serious crime scene photos, birth and death certificates, proof of address (and I wonder how many were in homes purchased for nothing, or next to...), etc. Complete police reports, all video......do we get an explanation on how cops running into the school ran past trees in the parking lot, in one video, when none are in that lot, too?

This ought to be good!

Please, Mr, Jones, do NOT consider settling out of court. Make them prove it.



posted on Apr, 17 2018 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

He has seen the evidence and has used "telepathy science" to deduce intent.

Go Phage




posted on Apr, 17 2018 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: UKTruth
I see the useful idiots are out in force trying to help shut down those with views they don't like.
I don't care if Jones is a fruitcake, those that want him shut down because they don't like his voice being heard are far more dangerous than Jones is with his wild accusations.
I'd call them scum of the earth, in fact.
So if the situation was reversed, and it was you whose child had been murdered, and Jones was talking about your family...you'd just sit it out, cuz free speech?
Please, tell us exactly what you'd do?


I'll tell you what I'd do. I would go on and speak to him, show him the evidence, and prove his theory wrong. No one, in all these years, has done that. Now, since they have filed this lawsuit, they will have to rove he's wrong, to be able to win. That means, evidence has to be shown. I can't wait to see how this all works out. I just hope he stands strong, and makes them prove it.



posted on Apr, 17 2018 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Thats as a stupid argument as saying " do you have an 13 year old daughter who is pregnant, otherwise only then can you enter a womens right to abortion debate"


(post by LadyGreenEyes removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes




I am not saying anything about Sandy Hook here,

Right.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Gotta ask, where do the rights of the victims begin?

Y'know, the families being accused of being the villains? Jones is, as someone already pointed out, a pillock.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 12:33 AM
link   
This action won't survive the discovery process.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: FlyingFox

Yes. It will.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: FlyingFox

Yeah, I think it will.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 12:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes




I am not saying anything about Sandy Hook here,

Right.


I am simply offering the pictures for discussion. Do tell; how do you explain this? Neither of those is from any conspiracy site. Both links are current, and you can check them for yourself. That picture is the same. How can that happen? I have no explanation. Do you? Are you denying the photos look the same? Something is off with those photos, one way or another. I don't know what that is.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 12:55 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

The thread is about a lawsuit against Alex Jones. There is a standing warning about what you are discussing.
Tread lightly.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 01:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

The thread is about a lawsuit against Alex Jones. There is a standing warning about what you are discussing.
Tread lightly.


Yes, it is, and as I stated initially, the burden of proof is on the accusers. I wonder, too, why now? Why five years after the fact, when people are mostly not discussing the case at all? Plus, why target him, if they received threatening calls, and not the people who actually called them? I'd think criminal charges would be in order for phone threats. Do we know if anyone was ever prosecuted for those?

Any other discussion, well, will save for elsewhere.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex>>>> I don't know. I think it happened, but the deep state has their fingerprints all over this. I think they could well have done the killing themselves and used this freak kid as a patsy. Just like in Florida where they knew what was going to happen and did nothing to stop it, in Boston where they knew what was going to happen, and in Vegas where they set the whole massacre up. Then there's the weird crisis actor angle. Some of the people in the videos DO look like other people we've seen around other shootings. They swoop in and ape for the cameras. Maybe they do this to deliberately create conspiracy theories so they can better deflect real questions and hide real evidence of their involvement.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Yes. The burden of proof is on the accusers. Why Jones? Read the complaint.



Do we know if anyone was ever prosecuted for those?
Why yes. We do.
time.com...
edit on 4/18/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 02:18 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Well, I would not count too heavily on justice being done here because if the justice system functioned, in this forth coming trial as it was intended, and not in the corrupt way it seems to these days, Alex Jones just might be licking his lips here.

If the legal processes work as they are supposed to, and the judge has the degree of integrity that a judge SHOULD have, some very uncomfortable and embarrassing things the powers that should no be do not want to see come to the surface just might pop their head above water.

Interesting case this will be.



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 02:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Yes. The burden of proof is on the accusers. Why Jones? Read the complaint.



Do we know if anyone was ever prosecuted for those?
Why yes. We do.
time.com...


Good to know, but were there not more who did that? I don't care what anyone thinks about the case; calling in death threats to anyone is just wrong. That said, the ones making the calls are at fault, not some guy they might listen to on the radio or wherever.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join