Judge in Sandy Hook Case Holds Alex Jones in Contempt – What We Know!

Alex Jones appears in a freeze frame extracted from a deposition video. The recording was posted to YouTube by the online news outlet HuffPost.

A Connecticut choose on Wednesday afternoon issued a contempt discovering in opposition to conspiracy theorist and InfoWars host Alex Jones. Fines of $25,000 per day will kick in beginning Friday except and till Jones sits for a deposition, however the fines will likely be refunded if Jones truly goes by with the deposition he skipped out on attributable to alleged well being issues final week.

The litigation surrounds alleged defamatory feedback Jones made in opposition to the households of the victims of the Sandy Hook, Conn. faculty bloodbath.

“The argument is on the plaintiffs’ movement for sanctions,” Choose Barbara Bellis mentioned at first of the 47-minute listening to. “This isn’t a press convention,” she continued whereas warning attorneys to not speak about settlement gives which had been summarily rubbished by the plaintiffs Tuesday night.

Christopher Mattei, an lawyer for the plaintiffs, mentioned he didn’t want to “belabor” the courtroom with all of the details whereas he and co-counsel had been in Texas trying to take Jones’s deposition final week.

Mattei mentioned Jones was ordered to attend a deposition on March 24 and 25 however failed. Mattei mentioned Jones “willfully” refused to indicate up regardless of an protection counsel admission that Jones knew he needed to present up.

“We consider the file establishes these orders had been clear, direct,” Mattei mentioned.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer famous that Jones appeared on his personal broadcast when he was purported to be showing for a deposition.

Mattei requested the courtroom to “set circumstances” that can “coerce” Jones to take a seat for a deposition.

Citing a “lengthy path of conduct,” the plaintiffs additionally requested the courtroom to “incarcerate Mr. Jones till he purges his contempt.” The plaintiffs additionally requested that Jones be fined for failing to take a seat and discuss.

Jones would relatively face the wrath of the courtroom than be deposed, Mattei prompt. He requested the choose to situation an order that might “change Mr. Jones’s calculus.”

The plaintiffs additionally requested for prices and charges to be refunded for the continued struggle.

Mattei mentioned he hoped any choice by the choose would drive Jones to “replicate [upon] the seriousness of the violation he dedicated final week” by failing to look.

Mattei additionally mentioned the plaintiffs had been asking for an instruction which allowed jurors to attract adversarial inferences from Jones’s refusal to take a seat for the deposition.

Cameron Atkinson, an lawyer for Jones, mentioned in a plodding, monotone method that he had a “shaky web connection” for the distant listening to however would try to soldier on.

“Mr. Jones acknowledges that the plaintiffs have a proper to take his deposition,” Atkinson mentioned. “He sat for 3, by my account, in circumstances associated to the Sandy Hook litigation in Texas.”

“What has occurred right here is he has in the end listened to his physician’s recommendation,” Atkinson continued. “First, initially, and in the present day, there was an uncontroverted file earlier than this courtroom, and there nonetheless is, that Mr. Jones’s medical doctors thought his circumstances had been critical sufficient to require emergency medical care, and so they rendered precautionary recommendation that included a advice that he go to the emergency room instantly.”

The choose butted in and requested whether or not the courtroom had the ability to guage whether or not the medical recommendation was “proper.”

Atkinson mentioned it might be “loopy” for the choose to not do her job as a choose. “What has introduced to you reveals past a shadow of a doubt,” he continued, that Jones’s medical doctors had been “making these suggestions.”

“Mr. Jones had no want to go to the emergency room, and most of us would share his lack of enthusiasm for going to the emergency room,” Atkinson added.

“It took some critical persuading for him to acknowledge the seriousness of his situation . . . to keep away from stress,” Atkinson continued.

Atkinson asserted that Jones by no means was in search of to flee the deposition — simply to postpone it till his “medical doctors cleared him to take a seat for it.”

Atkinson then extolled the stress that might outcome from two days of depositions.

“There was nothing within the file,” the choose mentioned, to counsel that Jones’s physician even knew what a deposition was.

“This courtroom mustn’t maintain Mr. Jones in contempt,” Atkinson continued. “If he skilled escalating signs that required him to be hospitalized . . . he needn’t attend his deposition,” the lawyer mentioned in an try to recap a earlier ruling by the choose.

The choose once more minimize in to appropriate Atkinson’s assertions.

“I used to be by no means given any proof that prompt he had escalating signs,” the choose mentioned.

Atkinson mentioned he wanted extra time to look into the proof surrounding Jones’s alleged medical scenario.

He mentioned Jones had a “troublesome alternative” — one which was “terribly troublesome”: the “penalties to his well being may show disastrous” if he sat for the deposition or may danger sanctions for caring for himself, the protection lawyer asserted whereas tripping over his phrases.

“We freely concede that he didn’t take heed to the preliminary suggestions of his medical doctors,” Atkinson mentioned.

The choose once more interjected a number of feedback to clear up the “file.” However she mentioned she was “delighted” to see that the defendant submitted some briefs a day early.

“That will have been attributable to me misreading the deadline,” Atkinson mentioned.

The choose, as if to coddle Atkinson, mentioned he did a “terrific job” with the paperwork.

“We consider the courtroom mustn’t maintain Mr. Jones in contempt,” Atkinson repeated. However, if the courtroom did, he requested the courtroom to not situation an arrest warrant. “It’s clear . . . that Mr. Jones has skilled some well being issues . . . we might submit that issuing an arrest warrant . . . would solely serve to exacerbate these well being issues. . . that alone ought to counsel in opposition to the issuance of that warrant.”

Atkinson once more asserted that Jones is aware of he should attend a deposition — some day. He prompt that “escalating fines” can be enough to “procure” Jones’s attendance at a deposition.

Atkinson then repeated strategies that since society “deferred” to medical doctors throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

“It was not an motion that was taken in unhealthy religion,” Atkinson mentioned concerning Jones’s failure to look.

Mattei responded that Jones must be compelled to look in Connecticut given his failure to indicate as much as be deposed in his residence state of Texas. He additionally famous that the file is silent as to no matter Jones’s present well being standing is perhaps. Mattei prompt that Jones’s ailment might have merely been a “sinus blockage.”

The choose gave Atkinson one more probability to reply re: the placement of the deposition — although she mentioned she usually wouldn’t give him an opportunity to take action.  She added that it was odd that the protection counsel didn’t supply a future date for a deposition in an effort to settle the matter.

Atkinson mentioned Jones was unavailable at first and finish of April — partly attributable to different litigation in Texas.  He mentioned Jones might be made out there round April 11. He added that the courtroom can be “inside its province to order” Jones to indicate up within the Nutmeg State for the sit-and-talk session.

“I’m a bit reluctant to place this on the file, however we perceive the plaintiff’s counsel enforces a reasonably strict Covid protocol at their workplaces . . . one thing Mr. Jones just isn’t prepared to do,” Atkinson added. “We might ask that be considered.”

The choose then issued a ruling.

She recapped Connecticut guidelines surrounding depositions, mentioned she denied a Jones request for a protecting order, and famous that the depositions had been scheduled for the twenty third and twenty fourth.

The choose then slammed Jones for working at his studios as an alternative of resting at residence or caring for his well being.

“The word fell far quick,” the choose mentioned close to a health care provider’s word supplied to the courtroom concerning Jones’s well being scenario.

Citing a earlier choice, the choose mentioned Jones may solely use hospitalization as an excuse to keep away from his deposition. Since he was broadcasting throughout his purported well being scare and never within the hospital, he was in contempt, the choose reasoned.

The choose bemoaned that the case had been churning for 4 years — and now, simply weeks earlier than jury choice, Jones nonetheless has not been deposed.

Jury choice is scheduled for August; proof is slated to be introduced by September.

“The courtroom finds by clear and convincing proof that the defendant, Alex Jones, willfully and in unhealthy religion violated with out justification a number of clear courtroom orders requiring his attendance at his depositions on March 23 and March 24,” the choose mentioned. She added that Jones “deliberately did not adjust to orders of the courtroom and that there isn’t a satisfactory factual foundation to elucidate his failures.”

The choose ordered Jones to pay $25,000 in fines “every week day starting on Friday, April 1, rising by $25,000 per week day” till he sits for the deposition. In different phrases, on the second day, the superb will improve to $50,000 and so forth, the choose mentioned by giving examples.

“The contempt will likely be purged when Jones completes two full days of deposition,” the choose mentioned.

She referred to as the fines “coercive” however “cheap and essential on this matter.”

The fines can be reimbursed if and when Jones sits for the deposition, the choose mentioned. She mentioned Jones tried to “manipulate” the courtroom course of by failing to take a seat.

If Jones doesn’t sit for depositions by April 15, the choose mentioned the jury can be allowed to imagine destructive inferences about Jones from his failure to take a seat.

The choose additionally mentioned the plaintiffs had been entitled to charges and prices related to the missed depositions.

In response to the courtroom docket, hearings are scheduled for April 4, April 18, and April 20.

The choose thanked the attorneys for his or her professionalism and wrapped up the continuing.

[image via a YouTube screengrab of a previous deposition]

Have a tip we must always know? [email protected]