Witness questioned about Jones criticism of Sandy Hook trial
Alex Jones' criticism of his trial in Connecticut over calling the Sandy Hook school shooting a hoax has become a topic of the proceedings
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who is on trial in Connecticut for calling the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre a hoax, continued Friday to describe the proceedings as a “kangaroo court” from his Infowars studio in Texas.
Jones' commentary became a focus of testimony on the fourth day of the trial, with a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families questioning a corporate representative for Jones' Infowars brand about how seriously the company was taking the trial.
The lawyer, Christopher Mattei, showed the jury a photo he said was of an Infowars webpage, depicting the judge in the trial with lasers shooting out of her eyes.
“On a scale of one to 10, how seriously is Infowars taking this trial,” Mattei asked the corporate representative, Brittany Paz.
“10. It's serious to me,” Paz responded.
The exchange occurred as Jones prepares to begin attending the trial in Waterbury next week and the judge, Barbara Bellis, considers a request by the families' lawyers to limit what Jones and his lawyer can say and argue in court. Jones is expected to testify, but it's not clear yet when.
Jones and his Free Speech Systems company are on trial in a lawsuit brought by an FBI agent who responded to the shooting and relatives of eight of the 20 first-graders and six educators killed in the December 2012 massacre in Newtown. They say Jones inflicted emotional and psychological harm on them, and they have been threatened and harassed by Jones’ followers.
Jones has already been found liable for spreading the myth that the shooting never happened, and the six-member jury will be deciding how much he and his company should pay the plaintiffs in damages.
In a motion filed Thursday, the families' lawyers asked Bellis for several limitations on what Jones and his lawyer, Norman Pattis, can say and argue at the trial, including barring them alleging that holding Jones and Free Speech Systems accountable for their actions offends the First Amendment.
Pattis outlined Jones' defense in a motion filed Friday in response to the families' motion.
“The defendants have argued, and intend to argue, that the plaintiffs have motives, biases and interest in exaggerating their claims against the defendants, to wit: their interest in gun control regulation and their hostility to Mr. Jones,” Pattis wrote.
Pattis also said Jones is challenging the amount of any damages to be awarded and is focusing on the families' motives for “overstating their damages: to wit: their desire to silence Alex Jones not just because he harmed them, but because they find his politics and political affiliations repugnant.”
Pattis added, “Mr. Jones’ conspiracy theory may by offensive to some, and ridiculous to others, but he has not gained millions of listeners by compelling people to tune in. He speaks a language that many Americans seem prepared to accept.”
On his web show on Thursday, Jones once again called the Connecticut proceedings “a show trial.”
The judge “now has to carry out this fraud,” he said. “But across the legal community, people are just saying, ’My God, this is something worthy of Venezuela. This is unbelievable.’ ”
Mattei has showed the jury evidence that Jones' viewership and sales of products such as nutritional supplements and clothing on his web site soared around the times he talked about the Sandy Hook shooting, suggesting Jones was profiting off the shooting.
Pattis countered in court Thursday that the jury should be allowed to hear that Jones believes there is a conspiracy to take guns away and enslave people.
“They have put before this jury the theory that Jones merchandizes fear for the sake of making a buck," Pattis said. "Our claim is that he recognizes the fear of the people and makes a dollar to support that premise.”
Last month, a jury in Texas awarded the parents of one of the slain Sandy Hook children nearly $50 million in a similar lawsuit against Jones and his company over the hoax claims. Jones also faces a third trial in Texas later this year over how much he should pay the parents of another child killed in the shooting.