Where Alex Jones goes, weirdness tends to follow. The sequence that occurred as he was questioned in a Texas courtroom on Wednesday was, for legal observers and laypersons alike, an excellent example.
the master. Jones was testifying in a trial that will determine how much he should pay the parents of a child who died in a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in 2012. He had already lost the case by default after failing to provide documents and testimonies related to his publication of conspiracy theories about the shooting .
In the midst of questioning witnesses, the parents’ attorney, Mark Bankston, blew up a surprise: Twelve days ago, Mr. Jones sent data from his iPhone, including text messages for two years, to prosecutors.
push revelation mr. pinkstone to suggest mr. Jones committed perjury in previous deposits. It also raised questions about how exactly the phone’s data is being shared.
Here’s what the legal experts thought at the moment when Mr. Jones encounters his phone data.
Attorney Mark Bankston said: #Alex Jones That his lawyer erred and sent him the entire Jones phone record. “Do you know that your lawyer made a mistake and sent me your entire text message history on your mobile phone 12 days ago?” Bankston asked. “Do you know what perjury is correct?” pic.twitter.com/IfIiP5UTIg
LawCrimeNetwork (LawCrimeNetwork) August 3, 2022
Alex Jones looked surprised, but was this really unusual?
“It’s brutal,” said Elaine Yaroshevsky, a distinguished professor of legal ethics at Hofstra University. “It really is wild. It’s a wild, wild attitude with a wild person.”
The exchange was open for several reasons. Information relevant to such litigation is usually delivered prior to trial, in a process called discovery.
Bruce Greene, professor of law at Fordham, where he directs the Center for Law and Ethics, said Mr. Bankston, as part of this process, would almost certainly have requested texts and emails from Mr. Jones sent in connection with Sandy Hook.
even if mr. Jones’ attorneys wanted to withhold some of his communications as privileged, and had to provide a list of these documents to the plaintiffs’ attorneys, who could then attempt to access the documents by appealing to a judge.
Stephen Judd, a professor at the University of Texas Law School who specializes in trial and appellate law, said in an interview that if what Mr. Bankston said on Wednesday that it was accurate and that Mr. Jones’ lawyers failed to take action after learning what they had done, “I would have found that amazing.”
Why do we believe what the parents’ lawyer said?
the master. Green said mr. Bankston was almost certainly telling the truth about how he got hold of the phone records, for two reasons. First, lawyers mr. Jones did not object to his presentation in court, which allowed the records to be accepted as evidence. Second, it would be a disciplinary violation of the master. Bankston is lying to the judge.
In most states, ethical rules require plaintiffs’ attorneys to notify their defense counterparts of the unintended disclosure. Texas, however, has no such rule. Still, mr. Bankston said in court on Wednesday that he told Mr. When notified, Jones’s disclosure team said, the attorneys “did not take any steps to identify it as distinctive or to protect it in any way.”
Professor Goode said that if Mr. Pinkstone’s description was accurate, he gave a lawyer to Mr. Jones gives an opportunity to assert excellence on the material in a more generous manner than is required.
On Thursday, attorney Mr. ft. Jones, F.; Andino Renal, an emergency order asking the judge to order Mr. Bankston returns all paper copies of documents produced from mobile phone records, to seal those already entered into evidence and to give his team an opportunity to provide alternate copies of relevant evidence.
At a hearing on the proposal, Mr. Rinal also called for a wrongful trial, based on Mr. Bankstone’s use of mobile phone records. He said that after inadvertently handing over the documents, he asked Mr. Bankston ignored the link that was sent and expected the request to be fulfilled.
the master. In response, Bankston said that the phrase “please ignore” did not create “any legal duty whatsoever,” adding that he was under no obligation not to see the documents. He described the movement as “trivial”. (He also clarified that the link to the records had been sent by Mr. Raynal’s legal assistant.)
The judge, Maya Guerra Gamble, denied the wrongful trial request and the warrant.
do you mr. Jones committing perjury? If so, is he likely to face consequences?
Experts said it was not clear if Mr. Jones will face charges of perjury. Under Texas law, a charge of perjury, or a misdemeanor, can be brought if he made a false statement under oath, or if, during oath, he swore to the truth of a statement previously made, with a clear understanding of the statement and intent to deceive. A charge of aggravated perjury, which is a felony, can be brought if the false statement was made in connection with an official action and could have affected the outcome of the case.
If investigators at the Travis County District Attorney’s office investigate the case and find that Mr. Jones has committed perjury, and can be charged with a crime. The office did not respond to a request for comment.
“At one point the judge said to Jones, ‘You believe anything that comes out of your mouth at the time you say it,'” Professor Good said. “I don’t know what he believes or not, so I have no idea if Travis County prosecutors are in any way interested in suing or whether or not they are actually able to file a case.”