More Alex Jones Discovery Misconduct

More Alex Jones Discovery Misconduct: eDiscovery Trends

Are you “jonesing” for more Alex Jones discovery misconduct stories? See what I did there? 😉 Well, here you go, this time in Connecticut!

According to Vice (Alex Jones and Infowars Were Immediately Sanctioned 5 Minutes Into His Second Damages Trial, written by Anna Merlan), failure to provide Google Analytics data proved to be a big, big problem for Jones’ side.

Jones and Infowars’ second damages trial began in Connecticut today with an immediate—and very significant—ruling against them over more Alex Jones discovery misconduct. Judge Barbara Bellis, who’s presiding over the case, ruled that because Jones and Infowars did not turn over Google Analytics data about the company’s traffic to the plaintiffs, they will not be allowed to make any arguments that they didn’t significantly profit from their Sandy Hook coverage.

The default ruling means that this trial, like the previous one in Texas where Jones and Infowars were ordered to pay a total of $49.3 million in damages, is solely meant to determine the amount of damages Jones and the company will owe.

As court proceedings got underway today, before the jury was brought in, plaintiffs’ attorney Alinor Sterling asked Bellis to grant sanctions against Jones and Infowars, saying they discovered a Google Analytics spreadsheet about Infowars traffic through June 2019 does exist, after the defendants claimed it didn’t.

Sterling called this part of a “sequence of misconduct” committed by Infowars, adding that it was “profoundly disturbing” and should result in what she called “significant sanctions.” Norm Pattis, a longtime attorney for Jones and Infowars, said he was “not happy” that Infowars hadn’t turned over the Google Analytics data, but he argued it was not relevant, and there was no evidence that Infowars had used this data to shape its on-air coverage.

In making her sanctions ruling, Judge Bellis said that Jones and Infowars had a “stunningly cavalier attitude with respect to their discovery obligations,” and said they had “consistently engaged in dilatory and obstructive discovery practices”. Bellis said that attitude led, in part, to the default judgement against them. She ruled that Jones and Infowars won’t be allowed to argue they didn’t significantly profit from Sandy Hook coverage; that will likely represent a significant blow to their attempts to limit the amount of damages the company will have to pay.

So, what do you think? Will we see more Alex Jones discovery misconduct to come? I wouldn’t be surprised! Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Hat tip (yet again!) to the “Data Diva” Debbie Reynolds – the third day in a row! Keep ‘em coming, Debbie!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Leave a Reply