The Official Alex Jones Thread!

[Mojo]

No. That never happens, and would probably be unconstitutional if it did.

If it had been in the UK I think there could potentially have been an injunction.

 

[JayUtah]

If it had been in the UK I think there could potentially have been an injunction.

Quite likely. Americans must often be cautioned about the more stringent enforcement of defamation in the UK.

 

[Mojo]

Quite likely. Americans must often be cautioned about the more stringent enforcement of defamation in the UK.

Hasn't your government legislated to prevent English libel awards being enforced in the US?

 

[JayUtah]

I'm a little surprised that Jones filed the petition. I would have expected him to keep rearranging the deck chairs until the court forced him to act.

That is essentially what has happened here.

Chapter 11 bankruptcy requires the petitioner to come up with a plan for restructuring the assets in order to fairly and equitably satisfy as many creditors as possible and hopefully to retain enough assets to continue in productive earning. The creditors also have a say about the plan. This repeats until the judge is satisfied, and the plan becomes an order that includes a discharge of the covered debts.

There is no guarantee that the petitioner will be able to come up with a credible restructuring plan. There is no guarantee that the judge will approve any plan the petitioner comes up with. What has happened, in a roundabout way, is handwriting on the wall that says Chapter 11 bankruptcy will be unavailable to Jones—no plan he is likely to come up with will let him retain revenue-producing assets while being fair to creditors according to bankruptcy rules. Normally this would result in a bankruptcy petition being rejected in toto, which would mean Jones is fairly on the hook for all his debt, with each creditor being able to pursue him separately without mercy to collect the debt.

By allowing Jones to convert his petition to a Chapter 7 (liquidation) petition, Jones still gets some bankruptcy protection. His other debts can be discharged for pennies on the dollar from the proceeds of the sale of his assets. But not the defamation judgment. He's still on the hook (pun very much intended) for that.

However, the Sandy Hook plaintiffs have the onus to pursue the debt. They will receive a payout from the Chapter 7 liquidation, and Jones will still be liable for the rest of the debt in judgment. But the plaintiffs will have to pursue him for each and every recovery of assets that a court can adjudicate. So hypothetically if Jones buys a new car, the plaintiffs would have the obligation to engage some legal means of seizing it at their expense.

 

[JayUtah]

Hasn't your government legislated to prevent English libel awards being enforced in the US?

Kind of. An act passed in 2010 prohibits the use of U.S. courts for enforcing foreign defamation judgments against persons in the U.S. if those judgments are inconsistent with U.S. law and constitutional guarantees. It is quite likely that an injunction made by a U.K. court that amounted to prior restraint on speech (even if clearly defamatory) would be unenforceable via a U.S. court.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Jones has illegally transferred his cash to others, mainly his parents. He thinks he can distract his victims by making them waste time on liquidating his trash.

 

[Mojo]

Kind of. An act passed in 2010 prohibits the use of U.S. courts for enforcing foreign defamation judgments against persons in the U.S. if those judgments are inconsistent with U.S. law and constitutional guarantees. It is quite likely that an injunction made by a U.K. court that amounted to prior restraint on speech (even if clearly defamatory) would be unenforceable via a U.S. court.

I'm pretty certain that an injunction can't be enforced outside the jurisdiction (see e.g. the Spycatcher case).

 

[JayUtah]

I'm pretty certain that an injunction can't be enforced outside the jurisdiction (see e.g. the Spycatcher case).

Not as of right, but a party may petition any appropriate U.S. court (i.e., state or federal) for the enforcement of a foreign judgment against a person in the United States. The U.S. court decides enforceability on such grounds as local, state, and federal law as well as standing and jurisdiction arguments as they pertain to the defendant. (Treaties ratified by the U.S. Congress have the force of federal law.)

 

[kookbreaker]

Maybe all his stuff is worthless crap anyway.

Tons of testosterone pills made of soy.

 

[JayUtah]

Tons of testosterone pills made of soy.

As garbage as that sounds, the Sandy Hook plaintiffs have a vested interest in any lawful way Alex Jones can earn a living and pay them. If he can make millions hawking worthless supplements, it doesn't matter whether it's low-key fraudulent. It's income they can garnish.

 

[Norman Alexander]

As garbage as that sounds, the Sandy Hook plaintiffs have a vested interest in any lawful way Alex Jones can earn a living and pay them. If he can make millions hawking worthless supplements, it doesn't matter whether it's low-key fraudulent. It's income they can garnish.

Hopefully that can be set leaving Jones only cents in the dollar earned. Like, one.

 

[Brainster]

As garbage as that sounds, the Sandy Hook plaintiffs have a vested interest in any lawful way Alex Jones can earn a living and pay them. If he can make millions hawking worthless supplements, it doesn't matter whether it's low-key fraudulent. It's income they can garnish.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but once Jones' current assets are liquidated and the bankruptcy discharged, isn't he basically free to set up a new operation that can't be touched by the Sandy Hook families? It seems to me that's probably why he agreed to the liquidation (well, that, and because he's probably squirreled away tons of assets).

 

[JayUtah]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but once Jones' current assets are liquidated and the bankruptcy discharged, isn't he basically free to set up a new operation that can't be touched by the Sandy Hook families?

No. Not all debts can be discharged in bankruptcy. Judgments for malfeasance are non-dischargeable. I believe the judge in this case has already ruled on that point.

 

[ponderingturtle]

As garbage as that sounds, the Sandy Hook plaintiffs have a vested interest in any lawful way Alex Jones can earn a living and pay them. If he can make millions hawking worthless supplements, it doesn't matter whether it's low-key fraudulent. It's income they can garnish.

He has started hawking pills from his fathers company not his one so that the money does to him without the sandy hook families being able to touch it. The fraud must go on!

 

[JayUtah]

He has started hawking pills from his fathers company not his one so that the money does to him without the sandy hook families being able to touch it. The fraud must go on!

They can garnish any income he receives from his father's company. If he's not a partner or owner in the company, but merely a contractor, subsidiary, beneficiary, or employee, that income is susceptible to ordinary collections recovery.

 

[plague311]

They can garnish any income he receives from his father's company. If he's not a partner or owner in the company, but merely a contractor, subsidiary, beneficiary, or employee, that income is susceptible to ordinary collections recovery.

I believe the idea isn't that he get paid from his fathers company. My guess is that he intends on just carrying around a credit card or debit card with his dad's name on it and spend everything from there. That way if he just doesn't put money in his name, they can't take it.

 

[Norman Alexander]

I believe the idea isn't that he get paid from his fathers company. My guess is that he intends on just carrying around a credit card or debit card with his dad's name on it and spend everything from there. That way if he just doesn't put money in his name, they can't take it.

I suspect that would still make him a beneficiary. As would receiving "surprise gifts" of bundles of cash in his mailbox.

 

[CarbShark]

I believe the idea isn't that he get paid from his fathers company. My guess is that he intends on just carrying around a credit card or debit card with his dad's name on it and spend everything from there. That way if he just doesn't put money in his name, they can't take it.

Sounds like falsifying business records to me.

Keep in mind also that the case has moved beyond the libel/slander case. That's over and done. Now it's bankruptcy and the families are creditors.

Now it's the bankruptcy laws that the court will follow, and if Jones tries delaying or doing shifty stuff the court will just step in and take over, as they would in any other bankruptcy.

Similarly, hiding assets or incomes with relatives won't fool a bankruptcy court and could expose family members to their own legal jeopardy.

 

[Shrinker]

I believe the idea isn't that he get paid from his fathers company. My guess is that he intends on just carrying around a credit card or debit card with his dad's name on it and spend everything from there. That way if he just doesn't put money in his name, they can't take it.

Aside from everything else, that looks a lot like tax evasion.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Sounds like falsifying business records to me.

Keep in mind also that the case has moved beyond the libel/slander case. That's over and done. Now it's bankruptcy and the families are creditors.

Now it's the bankruptcy laws that the court will follow, and if Jones tries delaying or doing shifty stuff the court will just step in and take over, as they would in any other bankruptcy.

Similarly, hiding assets or incomes with relatives won't fool a bankruptcy court and could expose family members to their own legal jeopardy.

This time it may happen. Widely reported yesterday that Jones has agreed to liquidate his assets in order to begin to satisfy the judgement Sandy Hook families were awarded.

Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has asked a U.S. judge to convert his bankruptcy into a Chapter 7 liquidation, giving up on an effort to settle massive legal judgments related to his lies about the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre...A Chapter 7 liquidation would not allow Jones to escape paying the legal judgments, but it offers a streamlined procedure for selling his assets under the supervision of a court-appointed trustee. NBC News news link

I don’t think the court has approved Jones’ offer yet.

Could be that they can seize his assets at any time.

Anyone familiar with Chapter 7 Liquidation?