[Deleted by author.]- 224
- 162
Top Poster of the Day:
Thirtythirst4sissies
Current Registered Users: 28,729
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Current software version: c889144
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I know he didn't get a trial. He was given the opportunity for one and he shit on the process. Three separate judges in three separate districts and two separate states gave him a default judgment for refusing to properly participate in Discovery.
If you think that's wrong tell me: in the TX case, what did Daria bring as corporate rep and what was she supposed to bring? If you can't answer this question then I don't want to hear even a hint of crying because it means you're r-slur that makes judgments about court cases based on what you read on social media.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Evey bit of evidence presented at the hearing was granted in discovery. Can you cite some discovery that wasnt presented? The man sat for more depositions and for longer than anyone in history.
As far as the corporate rep, he didnt have one (he filled that role) and the court demanded he produce one anyway, so he had to hire someone.
Lastly if discovery isnt produced the sanction is to assume the worst, not default. Judges should not be able to prevent you having a trial by jury, no matter what
Consider this rslur still gets his day in court
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
OMG fine I'll break it down
Wrong. Some of it came from the phone that Reynal accidently sent. Some was found by plaintiffs, like the Google analytics. See? You don't even know this, you're just repeating Alex's bullshit like an NPC.
Watch the depos, r-slur.
Lmao no he didn't. In fact, he had to be compelled through sanctions to appear.
And what did Daria bring? What was she supposed to bring? What did Rob prepare and what was he supposed to prepare for? Do you know?
If you refuse to participate in discovery to the egregious degree that Alex did you absolutely can be defaulted as happened here.
Honestly this is wild you don't have the first clue what you're talking about. You haven't watched any of the depositions, you don't know what was brought to the depos, what was shown in Discovery, and what was found by plaintiff's attorneys, but yet you feel that you're qualified to talk about this. It's a level of cope and r-sluration that I have difficulty expressing in words.
If you're going to continue to make me long post without knowing anything about this I'm going to start testing you and forcing you to watch depos or otherwise I'll spend all of my Marseybucks to annoy you.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
So they produced discovery then
So he appeared
Its almost aware guys.
----โ--------
You can hold a jury trial without the defendant if you have to, you ignored my point about this guy
Separately in the depositions the plantiffs lawyers insisted on asking questions like do you feel bad for earning 150 million on the backs of dead kids, yes or no, how the frick do you answer that. They couldn't indicate that the money was tied to the event he certainly didnt earn tjst money during the time. I feel like debating you on groomercord instead of words posting
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Dude, seriously? No it was never produced during discovery. It was withheld and sent accidently.
And did you watch the depos? He didn't participate properly.
This is actually the central point. Alex Jones and Free speech systems withheld information that showed that they directly financially benefited from their Sandy Hook coverage. That information only came out because plaintiffs were sent Alex Jones phone during the TX trial. After discovery. So it wasn't produced during discovery.
Would honestly be better.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If you want, give me a video with someone reflecting your best most succinct argument. I would appreciate you can indicate a particular section for me to watch, I would appreciate if it was shorter instead of longer
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I was more thinking doing like a groomercord debate night. Could be interesting.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Who to moderate?
My specific claim has less to do with alex jones and more to do with i dont believe that anyone can forclose your trial by jury right, no matter who you are, or how much of a pain in the butt you are.
Would you be willing to argue against that?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'd be willing to argue that but I'm just going to be presenting pages about how default judgments work so it seems kind of silly.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context