you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The courts are letting this go forward

They're "letting" it because it's a real lawsuit bought in the proper manner.

Alex Jones has chosen not to offer any defense because he has no defense.

He owes them money not because "they want to destroy him" but because he owes them to make it right for them after what he did (and accepted he did when he chose not to offer a defense)

[–]Zapped 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Alex Jones has chosen not to offer any defense because he has no defense.

Also, because there is a good chance this amount is greatly reduced on appeal and his team is weighing what the actual final cost will be with what he has gained off of his rhetoric.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What appeal? Alex didn't offer a defense. There's no appeal. Mark Bankston (the Texas plaintiff's lawyer) explained this exactly on the knowledge fight podcast. There's no avenue of appeal for a case which to which he didn't offer any defense.

[–]Zapped 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are thinking of an appeal for guilt, not for the amount of awarded money.