contents
How is the verdict against the conspiracy supporter to be classified? We asked the US law expert.
It’s all about this: On December 14, 2012, a 20-year-old shot dead 20 school children and six teachers in the US state of Connecticut. Radio host Alex Jones then claimed that actors staged the killing spree.
One victim’s parents sued Jones over his claims. They demanded $150 million in compensation. The Texas court initially ordered Jones to pay more than $4 million to his parents in compensation.
Does this judgment restrict freedom of expression? no Freedom of expression is heavily protected in the United States by the First Amendment, stronger than we are in Europe. In this case, it is not about expressing an opinion, says US legal expert April Stockfleet.
“What Jones said on his show was designed as a factual statement and also had a real effect on the lives of the plaintiffs. People were agitated and downright harassing the plaintiffs.” If his claims were true, Jones could have presented the evidence and called witnesses, Stockfleet adds.
Defamation laws evolved over decades through rulings by the US Supreme Court. Case law is constantly used to determine which speech is protected by freedom of expression and which is not.
What are the criteria for defamation? Defamation must involve someone publicly making a false statement of fact, typically through the media, and pretending that it is true. Apart from the offense of defamation, it is also about the intentional infliction of emotional stress, which can entitle to satisfaction, explains the expert.
“When someone publicly makes a false statement of this magnitude, it goes in that direction. You can’t publicly tell lies that damage a person’s reputation,” says Stockfleet. The plaintiffs argued that his lies about the death of their child had damaged their reputation and led to death threats from Jones’ supporters.
Legend:
Radio host Alex Jones has to pay the parents of a victim of the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting around $50 million.
REUTERS/Briana Sanchez
What is special about this judgment? Jones appeared to be sabotaging his own chances of success. He failed to turn over critical evidence, such as emails, to the court. The plaintiffs hoped to find evidence that Jones knew all along that his statements were false.
“Compared to the Heard-Depp verdict, very little evidence was filed by Alex Jones in the original verdict. This led to the plaintiffs asking for some sort of verdict in absentia, which was then approved by the judge.” This makes this case very unusual, says the law professor.
Legend:
Johnny Depp at the trial of his ex-wife Amber Heard.
Reuters
Typically, the first question in such a process is whether the speech qualifies as unprotected defamation. If so, the amount of the compensation will be negotiated. Jones’ trial largely skipped the first issue and went straight to the second: From the outset, the issue was not whether Jones would have to pay damages, but how much.
Will the verdict set a precedent? Probably not. Stockfleet is certain that the case will nevertheless set an example. “You can’t recklessly and knowingly tell lies in the media without being held accountable.” It is therefore unlikely that the Jones case will be taken up by the Supreme Court.