Why was Alex Jones denied his right to a jury trial??

[Text Drivers are Killers]

Europe persecutes holocaust deniers and america persecutes Sandy Hook deniers. This is totalitarian. People have a right to question what the govt tells them

https://www.thedailybell.com/all-ar...y-come-for-alex-jones-tomorrow-for-all-of-us/

aug 3 2022 The idea that Jones’ denial/questioning of Sandy Hook, through a labyrinth of cause and effect, through proxies, ultimately resulted in emotional trauma for parents is, to put it mildly, a stretch. Some might call it implausible.

The evidence presented is an extremely loose casual chain of events, one which a jury likely wouldn’t buy if the decision were left to them.

Hence the default judgment and straight to damages.

In a break from the Constitution, Alex Jones never got a jury trial to decide his guilt in this matter. Judges instead unilaterally issued a default judgment of guilt.

The 7th Amendment:

“In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”

To emphasize, the current jury proceedings are not to determine guilt; the state already decided that for them. The jury’s only job now is to decide how much Jones owes based on his pre-determined guilt.

]

 

[Flash]

Europe persecutes holocaust deniers and america persecutes Sandy Hook deniers. This is totalitarian. People have a right to question what the govt tells them

]

"The case was handed over to the jury to begin deliberations Wednesday evening. It will decide whether Jones, who has already been found liable by a judge because he did not hand over critical evidence before the trial began,"

 

[LV426]

Europe persecutes holocaust deniers and america persecutes Sandy Hook deniers. This is totalitarian. People have a right to question what the govt tells them

Wow...imagine thinking Holocaust deniers are victims.

 

[BidenPresident]

Wow...imagine thinking Holocaust deniers are victims.

TDK is clearly the shittiest person on the forum

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

"The case was handed over to the jury to begin deliberations Wednesday evening. It will decide whether Jones, who has already been found liable by a judge because he did not hand over critical evidence before the trial began,"

The constitution says he has a right to a jury trial. No mention of exceptions. And who's to say what critical evidence is anyway? THINK

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

TDK is clearly the shittiest person on the forum

HAHAHAHA. Another brilliant "argument" from the left.

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

Wow...imagine thinking Holocaust deniers are victims.

They are indeed victims. Why should people be sent to prison for merely disagreeing with what the media says?

 

[LV426]

They are indeed victims.

Victims...of their own poor judgment? Or victims of conmen and grifters?

Why should people be sent to prison for merely disagreeing with what the media says?

So you are also a Holocaust denier?

 

[floridafan]

The constitution says he has a right to a jury trial. No mention of exceptions. And who's to say what critical evidence is anyway? THINK

He already had a jury trial, Einstein. Has your head been up your butt?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Europe persecutes holocaust deniers and america persecutes Sandy Hook deniers. This is totalitarian. People have a right to question what the govt tells them

]

I guess you don't understand the difference between an criminal trial and a civil lawsuit.

Where in the Constitution is anyone guaranteed a jury trial in a civil lawsuit?

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

I guess you don't understand the difference between an criminal trial and a civil lawsuit.

Where in the Constitution is anyone guaranteed a jury trial in a civil lawsuit?

HUH?? The 7th amendment says it , you moron.

 

[Flash]

The constitution says he has a right to a jury trial. No mention of exceptions. And who's to say what critical evidence is anyway? THINK

Federal procedural law and case law establish rules and procedures on these issues. Default judgments are common when a person does not show up for the trial or fails to submit evidence for discovery as in this case.

I think the Texas case is being tried in state court and the right to jury trial in civil cases is one of the Bill of Rights which has never been made applicable to the states. The 7th amendment jury trial provision would not apply to this case although Texas has jury trials in civil cases.

The case set for jury trial in CT in September was cancelled because the Jones lawyer moved it to federal bankruptcy court. There are other Jones defamation cases going to court.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

HUH?? The 7th amendment says it , you moron.

And the 7th amendment is not applicable to civil suits filed under state law. Jones was sued in Texas and Connecticut state courts, not in federal court.

 

[Flash]

They are indeed victims. Why should people be sent to prison for merely disagreeing with what the media says?

Who was sent to prison for denying what the media says?

 

[Flash]

HUH?? The 7th amendment says it , you moron.

Only in federal cases. You don't get to withhold evidence needed for discovery and have a default judgment entered against you and then claim you didn't get your constitutional right to a jury trial. You can't have a jury trial if the other side did not get the documents and evidence they need to conduct that trial.

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

And the 7th amendment is not applicable to civil suits filed under state law..

The constitution makes no such exception, you liar. The idea is absurd. Then as now, nearly all civil suits are filed in a state.

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

Only in federal cases. You don't get to withhold evidence needed for discovery and have a default judgment entered against you and then claim you didn't get your constitutional right to a jury trial. You can't have a jury trial if the other side did not get the documents and evidence they need to conduct that trial.

That's a big problem with the discovery idea. The judge can always say "you're withholding evidence". Discovery should be banned. Why should anyone be required to help the other side.??

Anyway the constitution says you have a right to a jury trial in any civil suit involving over $20. No mention of judges being allowed to waive that right.

 

[Flash]

That's a big problem with the discovery idea. The judge can always say "you're withholding evidence". Discovery should be banned. Why should anyone be required to help the other side.??

Anyway the constitution says you have a right to a jury trial in any civil suit involving over $20. No mention of judges being allowed to waive that right.

Judges can't just say you are withholding evidence if you can prove you submitted it. You can't have a jury trial if the trial cannot proceed because you are not complying with procedures. There is no trial for a jury to hear.

The constitutional right to a jury trial in civil cases only applies to federal cases. Jones' cases was being held
in a Texas district court.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

The constitution says he has a right to a jury trial. No mention of exceptions. And who's to say what critical evidence is anyway? THINK

You are insane, but that's not a current event.

You just screamed at someone about Jones' not having a jury trial -- when the person clearly stated that the jury in Jones's case is currently deliberately.

Drink less, think more.

 

[Noking]

Europe persecutes holocaust deniers and america persecutes Sandy Hook deniers. This is totalitarian. People have a right to question what the govt tells them

]

This is a civil case and not a criminal case, in-case that you don't that.