Hacker News Reader

Comment by ceejayoz | Hacker News Reader

> The Jones lawyers argued that the discovery requests were for documents that don't exist, and that's why they were not produced.

And then they accidentally sent all of the non-existent documents to the plaintiffs, showing Jones had committed perjury. And then they forgot to claim it as privileged in a timely fashion. And then Jones got confronted with the lie in court. And then they got sanctioned for the fuckup. Oops.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/alex-jones-lawyers-acci...

https://apnews.com/article/legal-proceedings-fraud-crime-con...

View on HN

>And then they accidentally sent all of the non-existent documents to the plaintiffs

That's not what these two linked articles say. The AP articles about this state that the improper conduct was about disclosure of information the plaintiffs had sent the Jones legal team. Nothing to do with discovery that was requested from Jones.

https://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Alex-Jones-cellphone-...

> During parts of his testimony stretching over two days in a Texas courtroom, Jones repeatedly told jurors that he does not use email and that he had searched the contents of his phone for messages pertaining to Sandy Hook after he was sued by several family members of the victims for falsely saying the shooting was a hoax.

> Jones said that his phone search, done during the discovery phase of the trial, did not turn up any relevant messages. Texas Judge Maya Guerra Gamble has already ruled in favor of Sandy Hook parents Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis by default, saying that Jones did not comply with the rules of discovery in the case.

Okay, this is a different article.

Nevertheless, this one liner about this topic does not specify what the discovery requests were. If the request was about finding text messages regarding a specific topic, as the term "relevant" implies, then just because text messages from Jones exist (and were improperly disclosed), doesn't speak to whether or not those text messages were relevant in this context or not.

"repeatedly told jurors that he does not use email" is a hard claim to sustain when your emails get handed over later on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com