Alex Jones Defamation Trial: Sandy Hook 'Hoax' Lawsuit - Day Four, Part Two
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июл 2022
- InfoWars host Alex Jones was found liable for defamation in relation to the statements he made claiming the Sandy Hook school shooting was a hoax. Now, a Texas jury must decide how much Jones must pay to a victim's parents after publicly stating said falsehoods.
#AlexJones #Defamation #LawAndCrime
STAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:
Watch Law&Crime Network on RUclipsTV: bit.ly/3td2e3y
Where To Watch Law&Crime Network: bit.ly/3akxLK5
Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletter
Read Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: bit.ly/3td2Iqo
LAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:
Instagram: / lawandcrime
Twitter: / lawcrimenetwork
Facebook: / lawandcrime
Twitch: / lawandcrimenetwork
TikTok: / lawandcrime
LAW&CRIME NETWORK PODCASTS: lawandcrime.com/podcasts/
SUBSCRIBE TO ALL OF LAW&CRIME NETWORK RUclips CHANNELS:
Main Channel: / @lawandcrime
Law&Crime Shorts: / @lawandcrimeshorts
Channel B: / @lawandcrimetrials
Channel C: / @lawandcrimebodycam 
Развлечения
Do you look at other information when checking the accuracy of an article? "I don't understand the question". 😂😂😂😂😂
An he calls himself a journalist, if that is the state of journalism wow the states are in trouble
Are you a journalist?
I don't understand the question.
@@prechagirl Agree. He is hardlly a journalist !
@@edwinv196 I was a journalist ages 21-age 35. Free lance. Published in Saturday Review, Traveler, Baltimore Sun, NYT. To quadruple my income, then spent mega years climbing corporate ladder 🪜 at Del Monte, Con Agra, CHEP. Retired now; 74. You a journalist ever?
@@maryfitzpatrick3252 pretty sure Edwin is a professional troll in rank and file order of Alex Jone's insane fanboi empire.
📌 Day Four Part 2 time stamps:
4:44 Judge returns in court
5:20 Continuation of expert witness Fred Zipp testimony (audio issue)
21:51 Audio issue fixed + debate over evidence
29:51 ⭐ Continuation of expert witness Fred Zipp testimony
1:15:22 Judge returns to court (some audio issue)
1:16:22 Audio issue fixed
1:25:45 ⭐ Expert Witness Fred Zipp answers Jury questions
1:30:41 ⭐ Witness Christopher Daniels recorded deposition
1:47:28 ⭐ Expert Witness Becca Lewis live testimony
2:16:29 ⭐ Continuation of Expert Witness Becca Lewis testimony
Audio doesn't start before 21:45
You're a true hero.
Thank you!
Thanks, you’re a real one! So much of this video was just nothing happening lol.
"Let me ask you this way: is the sample size of this poll under a thousand people?"
"No, it's not."
"Have you ever heard the phrase, 'lawyers who lie should lose'?"
"Yes."
"I hadn't heard it but I guess you heard it with me, right?"
"Yes."
"Think Mr. Reynal should've checked that before trying to call you out in front of this jury?"
"Yes."
That exchange was not only brutal, and that last point sums up everything about this case, the problems present in this country, and AJ and his listeners as a whole - there is not only a lack of due diligence on the part of those who do mean well, but the presence of excessive deception by those who don't; as such, both suffer the inability to be anything but disingenuous and harmful. What they should spend their time doing in keeping with what they claim to believe, they don't. And in the end, we all have to suffer for their desire to be or willingness to remain willfully obtuse.
The sample size was probably under a thousand. I think they said 1019 people were contacted and several didn't respond.
@@zacharychase7652 have how many were polled? If you're going to n challenge it challenge it correctly
Wow, your ignorance is on full display here. Free speech is exactly that. It is not given to us by the government but it is recognized. This is a complete violation of that in every sense of the phrase. I'm not even an Alex Jones supporter but this is a blatant violation of his right as an American. If you think otherwise you obviously are not in support of this country or the very things that allowed us to be as great as we once we're, and it's this type of behavior (from people like you) that are ruining it now. You are more than free to move to a country that already has the values you are forcing on everyone else and see how life compares.
@@zacharychase7652 If the sample size is 1019, that means 1019 responded. Sample size isn't the number of people you call.
@@oscarsmith3942 I don't think they said the sample size is 1019. I think they said 1019 people were contacted.
What a stark contrast going from the Infowars “journalist” (mr I don’t understand the question) to Becca Lewis, Ms Columbia/Oxford/Stanford who is so well-spoken and informed. Night and day.
Christopher Daniels, Mr I don't understand the question is brain dead. Even if the question is dummed down. 🥴 Otherwise he's a blatant liar! Standard practice is the most coherent answer he gives.
You are only as smart as the 5 smartest people you associate with is the old saying..I mean Jones must get a government kickback to hire dull people
She was not only a breath of fresh air but she proved to me that I should have faith that there are still people with rational thoughts and intellect.
Is it just mine or was the first 20 minutes all clicking noises and no testimony that we can hear?
if that guy says he doesn't understand the question one more time I might have to skip his deposition lmao it's so frustrating
I found it hilarious, I wonder what his internal logic there was. Did he think that it would be less damaging to his employer if he, as the guy put in charge of reviewing articles for accuracy, pretended not to comprehend basic english than just answering the question would've been?
He looked like the lying jackass he is
The judge reminds me of how I feel when my kids start fighting. 🤣
"I don't understand the question" needs to be a meme -- up there with "I don't recall."
You do realize part why this is happening is because Alex and his side are barred from saying certain things but they have to give some kind of answer, if not allowed to say he has to respond somehow anyway.
@@krimzonthc
You do realize “i don’t recall” is the ultimate cop out.
@@robinladue4068 when you want it to be.
27:25 This happens if you don't do a discovery. You then can't bring in a video that would discredit a witness. Idiotic defense.
Christopher chose the "sleaze bag liar/ hostage video" lighting setting for his deposition.
LOL Brillant comment
He comes off as a real dipsh!t.
@@stevedeutsch1410 I don't understand the comment.
@@zacharychase7652 You're speaking in riddles
@@zacharychase7652 hahaha
“I don’t recall” “I don’t recall.” “I don’t recall.” Repeat 100 times.
“I don’t understand the question.” “I don’t understand the question.” “I don’t understand the question.” Repeat 100 times.
Do these “witnesses” think they are making Alex Jones look good? Do they think this helps him? What a bunch of disingenuous and unethical people.
Troll troll troll
@@IAMNOTME777 Methinks thou dost protest too much.
I think that maybe claiming that he doesn't recall helps Alex more than of they were to answer truthfully, at least. To those in their audience who believe that this is all a sham, Kit acting that way won't be a red flag to them. He's just sticking it to the globalists or something.
@@ronswansonsdog2833 did thou really speaketh liketh that?? Thou est troll...
they clearly don't know that the internet is forever.
One of the worst defense performances I’ve ever seen in a case. I could defend him better and I don’t have a law degree!
@@imperial_corner I was told they don't object to everything possible, only if it will help their case. Too many objections and the jury can think you are wasting their time.
The funny thing is, Info wars had several other attorney's before them and the plaintiff's attorney said the one's he ended up with are far better than all the others.
I have a lot of respect for this judge.🙂
She really is awesome
I’m not convinced… that Christopher could review anything for typos or accuracy.
😂
I wouldn't trust him to edit The Hungry Hungry Caterpillar never mind anything media based.
So many "I don't recall". Another phrase for, "I don't want to say anything incriminating."
not necessarily true
It is usually true.
Hmm sounds lke I hear these words in every criminal trial, or any hearing against a democrat politician. . "i don't recall" or I can't remember."
You are absolutely right, just a way not to incriminate themselves. I think this guy learned it from them. Pulling some of their tricks.
Notice how the defendant lawyer went to out his arm up on her desk again and she gave him “the look” 🤣🤣
Hahahaha aaah that one was awsome from the Judge 😅 it was like "get your arm away from my territory!! "
i LOVE her! it's 23:45 for anyone interested
@@Kingsleigh awesome 😎
@@Kingsleighthanks that was awesome! He’s such a bad lawyer and just not knowledgeable about court procedures and etiquette!
Based on the Juror questions thus far, it ain't looking too good for Alex Jones.
Alex was already found guilty because he did not show up to any of his past trials. This is only to establish how much he will have to pay up.
@@woj8926 Bigly
Should it ?
@@cakauvalls9295 Uh, no!? He directly contributed to lunatics harassing the families.
I've always been of the opinion that Alex Jones should definitely face consequences for the millions of listeners he misinformed about Sandy Hook.
@@cakauvalls9295 Absolutely not. One of the most vile people to ever live.
Terrible defence, both him and his client are the same kind of animal, they think no rule applies to them and they can say what they want.
Judging by the Jury's questions they are not buying any of the defense's arguments.
The way they got this jury was corrupt. Totally biased jury
Defense? What he is not allowed to put up a defense. Scam through and through. It’s ok though, it gives me precedence next time someone on the internet hurts my feelings. I will be suing so careful how you respond.
@@mikegibson7976 Infowars has had years of depositions for this lawsuit, and failed to provide sourcing for the claims they made, failed multiple times to have a corporate representative that knows what they're talking about, and failed to even provide all of the relevant videos during the discovery process.
They're either dragging their feet throughout this whole process (not just this trial), or they're massively incompetent. That's why they got defaulted, because their defence including a Wikipedia page for "false-flags"; that wouldn't be good enough for a high school paper.
@@mikegibson7976 you think all these parents went through was just their feelings got hurt on the internet? Either you haven’t been watching the trial or you’ve chose delusion
@@mikegibson7976 Gosh, you must be a real attorney. Good catch.
"ALLL RISEE" - Freaks me tf out ever single time haha
Oh Lord, more audio issues and beat boxing. It gets better around 21:00.
With all these commercials you should be able to afford good audio equipment.
Anyone else’s sound messed up until around 22:00?
Yes.
The defense is so weak. Did Alex give them any supplements to toughen up 😂
It's weak because the woke judge is not allowing AJ to mount a real defence.
@@bellabell737 Gosh, you must be a real attorney. Good catch
@@abbynormal1965 no, have you seen the court subpoena? cause that’s what it says
@@makeouthill4822 Golly, the real attorneys are thick as flies in here. I have been told there is documented evidence that the plaintiffs attorneys are lizard people in the employ of the Illuminati. I am not saying it is true,, but it does make you wonder.
@@abbynormal1965 lol and yet you’re making a joke but whatever the document of the Austin texas court literally says he’s not allowed to have his first amendment and that he’s already guilty
"What is 1+1?"
"I don't understand the question."
Love the helicopter audio that went on for so long in the beginning. So pleasant.
Where did Alex go? Does he need to get back to his safe space? Does he have bladder issues? Is there an emergency concerning his bankruptcy case? I am only asking the questions, not stating that he has these issues, but it does look suspicious.
He's at work selling lies and boner pills.
He's out trying to hide his money.
He has more disinformation to infect the brains of his sad sack minions.
no i think he was busy filing for bankruptcy due to the 150 m. he doesnt have he is not cnn. your arrogance shows your ignorance and hatred of alex
@@annetteaumiller3681 Bitcoin, the last refuge of scoundrels.
alex should provide some brain force to his lawyer
Judging by the quality of the RUclips comments from people claiming they buy pills from InfoWars, Brain Force doesn't work.
That's a lol
Nah Insta Hard would be better suited
His attorneys are a joke
Uhh, you need the brain force because your comment is baseless and bias without any merit of truth and or righteousness.
The defense once again is absolutely horrible
Can’t do much against the tyrannical “judge”.
@@donaldm2582 Can’t do much to defend against THE TRUTH. Alex Jones is a proven huckster.
@@donaldm2582 hahahaha
@@donaldm2582 lol... are you blind?
@@donaldm2582💯%
I wonder...do supporters of Alex Jones feel that the coached testimony and uncooperative behavior of the defendant's witnesses is "helping Alex Jones"?
Coached huh? Sounds like a "fringe conspiracy theory".
It’s a game. The plaintiffs play the EXACT same games, don’t get it twisted.
Coached? Seems like every other witness who speaks in front of Congress on Cspan. Lawyers don’t like when witnesses know their rights, know the lawyers are scum and play their little lawyer games.
@@tioswift3676 Let's consider an example. Have you compared the testimony of Daria Karpova when Jones' attorney questions her, versus when the plaintiff's attorney questions her. And do you feel that the striking differences in her behavior is "helping Alex Jones"?
@@TrilobitesRTasty Yes I did. Again, this is pretty normal. Go watch a few civil hearings...typically the defense witnesses are going to be seemingly “helping” the defense, especially when a witness literally worked as an employee for the defendant for years, sure it’s going to be different than when plaintiff lawyers are questioning. She’s doing EXACTLY what she’s supposed to do. Are you actually surprised that defense witnesses are there to help the defendant?
the lawyer from my cousin vinnie being unavailable alex ended up with this guy
Good lawyers didn't want this case.
Oh that guy showed up in the CT trial!
2:51:18 - "Do you think Mr Reynolds should have checked before trying to call you out in front of this jury" Now THAT was a sick burn by plaintiff lawyer. To pull off that wit on the fly shows experience and confidence.
@@aholegunner 2 hours 51 minutes 18 seconds? The video is over 3 hours sir.
@@slyse7en yeah, just skip to 2:50. What’s the confusion?
I was floored. 2:50:57 The defense didn't object to his "Lawyers who lie should lose." comment.
@@lances8460 AGREED! Also judge let it go (i think she hates defence). Totally irrelevant and warrants a scolding but hey, its entertaining.
@@lances8460 The defense didn't object to it because it's a direct quote from Alex Jones' lawyer's opening argument. Jones' lawyer made a big deal out of it; he emphasized the line and said he believed it.
Also, it was a great burn.
He doesn’t understand the question 🙋
AUDIO IS BAD AGAIN!!!!
Diversity hires.
Is InfoWars trying to get the money for compensation by suing their lawyers? Holy crap, this guy is practically Lionel Hutz
In one of the depos posted online the lawyers for the plaintiff asked Owen if they have considered suing their own lawyers. The thing is any money they win in that lawsuit would most likely go to the plaintiff to cover the damages.
Yes. A law talking guy.
This is like their 8th lawyer or something.
Chris Daniels has an acute "inability to comprehend a simple question" issue.
convoluted and ambiguous questions are not simple questions.
@@littlefish9305 What did you find convoluted and ambiguous specifically?
@@kquat7899 I found some of the questions to be convoluted and ambiguous.
@@littlefish9305 I said "specifically" i.e give an example.
@@kquat7899 why don't you give an example of a simple question Mr Daniels is unable to understand. I don't have time to fetch balls.
Ms. Lewis, you had me at hello, with the depth of your education and research 🧐 experience. Bye 👋🏿 Alex.
She doesn't understand basic statistics.
@@zacharychase7652 Anyone who can analyze Nielsen and Spectra RAW data can reverse engineer probabilities to a smaller test sampling. No easy feat. Kudos to her.
@@maryfitzpatrick3252 I can't read your comment. I don't think "smaller test sampling" makes sense.
@@zacharychase7652 That is how Nielsen data works. Heaps of raw data eventually distilled down to a smaller cross section representation. Don’t overthink; Nielsen does that for you 🎯
@@zacharychase7652 Can’t read my comment? Apparently you could read the part you objected to. 🙄 Appears to me you have never had the “joy” of working with Nielsen nor Spectra raw data that requires brain drain to manipulate it to a smaller user-friendly representation (smaller test sample which is a Nielsen terminology). Your critique of Becca Lewis’s statistics capabilities demonstrates your lack of understanding of the tools Becca Lewis uses.
Very impressed with Becca lewis here. This defense can not get out of it's own way.
Must not take much to impress you then! Her grammar is awful, constantly using uhm uhm! C’mon man
@@williamkuykendall7569 It's also clear she doesn't understand basic statistics.
@@williamkuykendall7569 maybe she should have robotically said i don't recall a hundred times?
I agree! I could listen to her for hours. Very knowledgeable expert.
@@williamkuykendall7569 Poor grammar? Please. I expect there's a similar comment here somewhere where you say the same about the barely literate professional wrestler... er, I mean "investigative journalist" whose deposition was played for the jury?
Ms. Lewis spoke clearly and concisely and broke things down for the jury in uncomplicated language a layman could understand. The fact that you take issue with her testimony says more about you and your bias than it does about her ability to testify as an expert witness.
Columbia and Oxford University, this is the standard. Alex is very lucky he was not held accountable in a British Court he would have been pulled to pieces.
When Alex debated Andrew Neil ( British) it was so funny the difference in intelligence and journalism was so vast you would not think that Alex believes he works in the same profession as Andrew Neil.
Alex jones needs to be bankrupted and everytime he talks rubbish they should sue him.
When she said this I KNEW that was why again Jones isn’t in the courtroom again🤡 he’s a clown who can’t face actual, vetted and credentialed professionals.
So good to see the Infowars crew having to have their work judged by real people from the outside world.
Real people? The sandy hook crowd sued everyone. They put Remington out of business. This is political. Adam lanza killed those kids, not Alex jones
you call that hack a "real person"?
Hahahahahahahaha it's all fake you troglodittttte
@@cougarkitty9560 You are moving goalposts. Jones is charged with defamation, the fact that it is tied to a shooting is incidental. No one has ever claimed Jones had any part in the actual shooting.
@@LoneRanger-ik1qb I wasn't referring to Jones, I was talking about the courtroom.
How great is that editor guy on the screen hahahahahahahha 👏👏👐👍
The defense lawyer said lawyers who lie should lose in his opening statement. LOL. Got ya moment.
Cut himself, because his lies have been shown by the plaintiff's attorney.
Edit: typo
Shout out to Dan and Jordan from Knowledge Fight for helping critics of AJ be more informed about him than 99% of his own IW listeners. LOL
Knowledge Fight is an excellent source to understand the source of conspiracy theories, and what facts they misunderstand - both on purpose and accidentally.
@@jimb1117 Andy in Kansas you're on the air
@@JTGwozdz Not easy to distinguish. Jones pivotal idea that supernatural blood lined families run the world - derived from him reading conspiracy books as a teenager - appears to have an 'integral' element to it, although less so in more recent times.
IT'S TIME TO PRAY!
@@miketomlin6040 as Mike Tomlin may say, Alex Jones is not concerned with the Truth and things of that nature.
You are totally right, his early adoption of None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Behold a Pale Horse, and whatever his dad was telling him is critically important to understanding his world view and behavior!
I think Christopher Daniels needs an upgrade of his operating system. His answers are limited, you must ask the right questions.
Why is the audio always messed up at the start of these trials about Jones
That moment @23:45 when Alex Jones Attorney was about to put his arm in the Judges Bench. The Audacity 😲🥴
if you watch the judge she checked him. He thinks he is master 0f cool.
Wow some of the most pettiest nitpicks in this comment section.
It looks like this is gonna be his last trial 😂
@@k.k.9571 Not a fair trial. Judge has sided W/ plaintiff beforehand. She's gettin' paid for a one-sided biased trial that doesn't even allow anyone from Info Wars to maintain their innocence, they wouldn't even enter their list of videos into evidence. When that attorney tried to have that Hollywood gotcha moment saying, Info Wars is actually an infomercial because merely trying to sell supplements and trying to financially support your platform is wrong somehow? But when corporate media has a ton of paid infomercials on their platform, nobody goes after them for it. That tells you all you need to know, rules for thee and not for me. IT'S A WITCH HUNT!
he had it there all day Tuesday too, until the judge scolded him
The camera crew needs training 🤣
...same with microphone crew, I'm at full volume!
*Defense Lawyer stands up*
Judge: Overruled.
Lmao so true
Do you know why? Apart from staged, deep state etc etc? Do you know the legal arguments and why they're not valid? When you in addition flip the finger inside the court, calling another lawyer dishonest in court and even lays the arm on top of the judge's desk ... By disrespecting the court you attack the authority of the court. I get that it's a personality trait of smug sludges and not intentional but they're still his actions.
He's not the sharpest laywer either and when he can't comprehend the rules or decisions made then yes, it may seem unfair.
Constantly
@@lulumilieus8076 It's just a bad lawyer. He doesn't follow the rules and are unaware of many. Maybe he think it's the only way to reduce the 150 million is by cheating.
@@vileguile4 Perhaps it's not a bad lawyer, but rather a biased judge
Law & Crime needs a new audio engineer/producer. Wtf is up with the dead audio for hours??? Do you not have anyone monitoring the stream?
We obliviously weren't meant to hear that. This is posted, not live
My guess is they're talking about information that's not meant to be public, someone's address or some other personal information.
I saw a mod say during a livestream that the audio is whatever the courtroom has set up. Law and crime doesn't set up a sound system in any courtroom.
@@lamanamanume it was live then directly uploaded lol , so it was live hasnt been edited.
Hours??? Frick....anyone have a time stamp?? This is crazy!! And why don't they provide that info??
Wow. From the woman the past 3 day and now to the “I don’t remember” guy… it’s “amazing” the jury didn’t believe Jones 😂
😂😂😂😂. “I don’t understand the question”. What a weird do.
These people know exactly what they are doing.
Columbia and Oxford grads vs. the “I dunno guy”. 😂😂😂😂😂
The interviewer is terrible! How about some clarity and brevity in questions? Would you say that you agree that you did not say that people were going to not do what they said they were going to do?🤣🤣🤣🤣
Anyone notice the defence lawyer go ask the camera operator to bring his camera back out at 3:00:54? Possibly wanted him being recorded when telling the judge about the bankruptcy?
She is literally touched. 🤣
Another video featuring 20 minutes of morse code audio to start with? I'm wondering also what overbearing sound we'll get in the audio today. Notebook key pounding again? Yesterday I thought somebody was playing Hungry Hippos next to the mike.
I’ll be honest Alex should have chosen a better lawyer.
He should have avoided being a nutjob also
barnes should've been alexs lawyer
The "good ones" either won't work with him, or withdraw after having interaction with this tim foil hat mental patient named Alex Jones. Barnes can't help him, he is too busy "filling in" at the "news desk" for InfoWars. Barnes isn't any smarter than Jones is, he just sounds like he is
He's had multiple teams of lawyers. He's made his bed.
Terrible clients (like ones who don't show up) tend to get terrible representation.
Alex's lawyer openly perjured himself in front of a jury on that sample size thing that dude needs to be disbarred jeez
Suuuure sure. Keep stretching
Disbarred, because of that? Are you insane?
🤣🤣🤣you need a 🤯
Free Alex and OWEN
WE ARE IN AMERICA
@@lunapasquale Sure you are completely fine with people defaming people - nice one.
4 days and it seems like the microphone for the camera is lost in the mail.
They aren't there to please you..
Where on earth did they get the first two witnesses from?
Nice lawyers 💀 Alex
Throw the book st AJ and shut his vitamin pushing scheme down.
There are people who have listened to Jones and people who regurgitate what they have heard about him.
As a pharmaceutical exec, I couldn't agree more. We must put an end to all this vitamin business & get back to pushing more happy pills. I have my eye on a third vacation home & a brand new yacht that won't pay for itself!
@UCFgrP_wmdex6ou2Iq7XcD8A aren't all vitamins not approved by the FDA ? Every bottle I get from CVS says not approved by the FDA so why is Alex Jones being scolded for his not being either?
@@marrymeglenndanzig For more than 8 years I was in medical records. Just a fly on the wall listening to the pitches of drug reps. Want a time share in Hawaii? Want tickets to a sports game? Prescribe this without reading the very fine print in the foldout.
Why was there no sound for 20 minutes
What’s wrong with the sound for the first 10-15 mins of the video?
Lol these video depositions really highlight the hiring standards at Infowars. These guys come off like cartoonish goons. Daria and Owen are top notch, cream of the crop by comparison. I really liked them. That would have been amazing if they had made that Full Metal Jacket Gomer Pyle looking dude the corporate representative and put him on the stand.
lmfao all wack job losers for sure
Cartoonish goons? Oh boy, if that's the case then let me hold my self back from starting with Rachel Maddow and ending it with "The View". That would be a spicy sequence of animation.
This comment shows me you have zero experience whatsoever in any manager role that is responsible for hiring.
I'm at the guy in the blue shirt part and I don't find bad at all. The one asking questions keeps on asking about the "three source rule" but that hasn't been in practice in the last decade. Most articles only have one source... it's video of a a event (one source), or what a public figure said (one source), or what an anonymous source said (one source).
@@tioswift3676 lmfao i managed my entire life and retired at 38
Oh poor poor kitt. He really never was the brightest bulb
That witness has an old lady haircut and style😂😂
When is the next day in court?
Mr "I don't recall" was so unhelpful to AJ
The audio on these videos are for the birds!
I don’t understand the question.
Where is the live stream?
@@annaleefinch7266 lol yes there is. 459th district court channel.
i dont recall i dont know
alex is screwed other (media not media) get sued how is alex different
She knows how to read, she goes to Stanford, lol 😁😂🤣😂🤣😁
My parents totally paaaid to have me like, go to Coluuumbiaaaa and Stanford, bc it's like, you knooow, like, totally the top school with books n stuff, like even in this fieeeld and stuff. I'm like totally educaaated in like, nonsense degrees on social and communications type stuff that's like, you know about ppl in societyyy. I'm totally popular on Twatter and I'm like totally serious about political stuff, like I totally have the Ukrainian flag as my profile pic bc it like saves their livesss n stuff..
no sound for 22 minutes great job
Who is the ash blond male witness on the stand at around 40.00 in? I missed the beginning due to video sound issues.
Can’t believe I found this guy comical at one point. In the time he just seemed like a nut job going off on funny conspiracy rants.
I listen to a podcast knowledge fight which plays clips from Alex and fact checks him. This podcast makes Alex still hilarious to me as they expose his BS. Couldn’t listen to him raw but these lads on the podcast do a good job of making his rubbish enjoyable.
It's funny how everything that is going on in the world right now he talked about 10 years ago some conspiracy theories huh go back to watching the fake main stream media idiots
How did you lose your sense of humor?
@@Free-SpokenMedia it's called growing up and not being edgy anymore. Only some edgy teenager would find any of the stuff Alex does funny. He is causing real world harm as is shown by this trial.
@@8redDEATH2 Sure, but good comedy is edgy or it's not funny.
IF Alex jones loses this trial it is in big part due to the arrogance and attitude of his lawyer. He's so full of himself.
He already lost. This is the financial penalty phase. Did he not tell his viewers that part?
@@LawNerdAmber to be fair, he isn't allowed to talk about it. I know he went on air with Owen (who isn't supposed to talk about it either) on Tuesday to... yes, talk about it, but hopefully they won't do it again. He could have told his audience earlier though. And he might have. But then he probably shouted five times more and five times louder about free speech and other stuff so that the facts kind of got lost somewhere. So I don't expect his audience to know what's _actually_ going on.
@@Vindsus86 you don't determine money damages in a case that was Won😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@squirrelcovers6340 what? The jury is gonna determine damages in this case that Alex lost.
@@squirrelcovers6340 I'm confused. Did you misread my post or something?
Did she just say Syracuse has an “incredibly prestigious law school”? 😂😂😂
She said prestigious Communications Law School.
I don't recall
This is a kangaroo court.
You need to FIRE YOUR SOUND ENGINEER!!!
Why is there a cameraman. Pointing his camera towards the jurybox?
Becca Lewis says the quiet part out loud. 2:11:50
Christopher Daniels testimony was hilarious. Dude came across as being in the bag for Infowars.
Oooh man🥴 ooh noo I'm dying inside. But to be fair to him, I get the feeling that this is how he is as a person. What do you guys think?🙂
@@tinag9138 I'd be hard pressed not to smack him upside the head. 😖
I don't recall. I don't recall. I don't recall. I don't understand. I don't understand. He should have that printed on a tee shirt. Some real geniuses you got there. And these are the people you fools worship.
Just stop, you’re embarrassing yourself with your lack of basic knowledge of civil suits.
Don't give Jones any ideas, he might sell the crap on his website.
Stfu. You’re clearly the fool here
Hillary Clinton was once interviewed by the FBI and she used the phrase "I don't recall" 39 times. This guy is an amateur.
I'm with her.
Oh no! The audio!
Chris Daniels the Parrot.
"I don't recall."
How did this person get into Stanford and Oxford.
All the ivy league’s are governed by affirmative action now. They’re an absolute joke at this point. This broad is perfect example.
Monica Lewinsky
By studying hard. How did you not get into oxford
@@TheNeisseria78Hello, his question was a so called "Rhetorical question", he is saying "how can someone with only this much intelligence be admitted into Stanford and Oxford?" Greetings.
@@TheNeisseria78 named yourself after an STD. Brilliant
Bill is my favorite. He's a ruthless monster of the law.
And eats giant bags of gummy worms while taking depositions
@@eutrophic04
Eh, the gummy worms just make you nervous. I've seen him make a guy _cry_
ed. I know I called him "ruthless" before, but as soon as the witness (Kit Daniels?) started to cry, he immediately pulled his punches.
Glad im watching now
Ok, I didn't exactly follow this the first time, but when the judge mentioned that the defendant's lawyer had this document excluded from evidence I came back to it. So, at 2.:00:37, the defendant's lawyer objects on the ground of hearsay. The judge is forced to admit this "evidence" would constitute hearsay and thus should not be admitted, but then she allows it to be admitted as evidence by having the lawyer ask the witness questions about the article to the point that she can read sections of the article to the jury.... How is that any difference from admitting this as evidence in the first place? If you want the article in evidence, but cannot admit the entire article, then you should work with the opposition to create a redacted version that can then be admitted. Simply having the witness read sections of the article that would be hearsay as a whole, that the opposition objected to on those grounds and won, is completely circumventing the entire purpose of the sustained objection. An absolute mockery of the law and proper procedure.
The blonde witness doesn't make sense to me. She using the words peer review, data collection, and methodology that normally is just used for scientific experiments and then applies it to articles she read on the internet about Alex Jones? It doesn't make any sense.
Her degree is like, you know... in Twitter and stuff.
sticks and stones can hurt my bones.. but words can never hurt me.. 150mil? this is a joke trial but this is the world we live in.. sad sad situation.. you cant speak anymore.. dont say what you think.. might hurt someones feeling and they will sue you .. sad stuff
That’s nonsense. We can all say whatever we want but if you want to knowingly make false statements, then you might be held accountable for that and rightfully so.
@@lisafink98 So if you have a false opinion on an event that hurts someone’s feelings you should be forced to pay them millions?
Ooooh, didn’t know this was happening!!
Why no sound for the first 20 minutes?
Maybe the queen of her courtroom ordered it to be so.
Don't know.
@@elainecampbell4277 the sound worked during the livestream. Whatever Law&Crime Network uploads is filmed and recorded with their own equipment, not with that of the court.
@@Vindsus86 Thanks.
3:03:00 oh you thought about it before and already decided. Yeah sounds about right.
1:18:30 says it all
What do you mean? I went back and listened & I’m not sure I understand.
The judge is reading purposed questions from the jury? What does that say to you?
Yep. That was a JUROR'S question! 😁 lol. The defense lawyer's sphincter tighted when her honor started reading that!
She dismisses anything of Alex saying “ I’m sorry “ or “ I think sandy hook happened “ and only focuses on the videos of him saying it’s a government operation
@@ALIMUNTH well yeah cuz there’s an overwhelming amount of those
Almost everytime I go to the comment section, a commercial starts, I wonder if it's just like that now or if I just got really bad timing?
First 20 minutes + with the sound like of rapid footsteps. Cross examination just getting 'too good for us' was it? So we need ' protection'.
Whatever it is ..wierd .. and I would like to know how it could happen.
It happened yesterday too.
this is a clown court room compared to johnny depp
I wouldn’t say it’s a clown show. Depps trial had a lot more money to throw at it. This is being brought by ordinary parents who lost children. They don’t have the millions in the bank to hire top notch highly expensive lawyers. It does show but it’s not the parents fault.
What is the audio problem? Not the first time
AUDIO COMES BACK AT 21:50
you're welcome lol
God THANK YOU 🤣
This witness is so beyond biased, she shouldn't be considered credible. Constant arrogant smile as well during cross-exam.
You just don't like what she says!