Sandy Hook Defamation Trial Win

FILE - In this Sept. 5, 2018, file photo, Infowars host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones speaks outside of the Dirksen building on Capitol Hill in Washington. A Connecticut judge has found Jones liable for damages in lawsuits brought by parents of children killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. The parents of several children sued Jones over his claims that the massacre was a hoax. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

Barbara Bellos, a Connecticut judge, has found Alex Jones liable for a lawsuit brought forward by the husband of one victim of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. This was in response to Judge Bellis’ finding that Jones and his companies had “failed to produce critical material information necessary for the plaintiffs to prove their claims.” Jones will now have to attend a hearing to determine how much he will have to pay.

Jones was also found in default by Maya Guerra Gamble, a Texas judge. Jones was also accused in defamation lawsuits brought against him in Texas by Sandy Hook families. Jury trials will determine the amount Jones and other defendants must pay in these cases.

In all three cases, Alex Jones, his companies InfoWars, Free Speech Systems and others, refused to or failed to hand over the documents and information that they were ordered to.

Jones and Norman Pattis, his Connecticut attorney, stated that the Texas ruling “takes not account of the tens to thousands of documents produced and the hours spent sitting for depositions as well as the various sworn statements in these cases.” They also said they were “distressed” by “blatant abuses of discretion by trial court.” We will see to it that these cases are heard on their merits.

AP News reports in Connecticut that Jones’ lawyers denied violating court rules regarding document disclosure. They asked for Bellis to be removed from the case. Bellis has been accused of being biased.

Alex Jones started promoting the idea that the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax to aid anti-gun groups crack down on Second Amendment rights. However, no one had actually been murdered there.

Jones’s legal complaints to victims’ families claim Jones did not believe that the shooting was a hoax, but created the theory to make a profit. He encouraged his followers to investigate the incident for themselves as part of his profiteering. Jones’s conduct led to ongoing harassment and abuse of the surviving members of his family.

Jones and other defendants sought to frame the lawsuits in a case of free speech. They described the suit in a motion to dismiss as “a strategic tool used by Plaintiffs for silence Defendants free speech and an effort to hold Defendants responsible for simply expressing opinions regarding questioning government”

Jones and the other defendants have not had much success in their defenses, despite having been involved in the Connecticut case and three Texas cases.