Lawyers for Infowars host Alex Jones said Thursday they would ask the Connecticut Supreme Court to intervene in a contempt of the court ruling entered the previous day by a judge at the Waterbury trial court.
As Law&Crime previously reported, the contempt decision forced Jones to pay escalating charges that started at $25,000 a day — and increased by $25,000 every weekday thereafter — until Jones sat for testimony in a defamation case brought by family members of the victims of the massacre submitted to Sandy Hook School. If Jones does not sit and talk two full days before April 15, the final date of possible sanctions, the total amount Jones would have to pay in fines would be $1.475 million for 11 days of failure.
The trial court judge Wednesday said it was necessary to despise Jones for using medical excuses to skip testimony scheduled for March 23-24 in Texas. Those excuses, the judge said, are flimsy at best.
“The Court finds, by clear and compelling evidence, that Defendant Alex Jones willfully and maliciously violated, without cause, several clear court orders requiring his presence at testimony,” the judge said called. She added that Jones “willfully failed to comply with the court’s orders and that there is no reasonable factual basis on which to explain his failure.”
The judge ordered Jones must “council every day of the week beginning Friday 1st. In other words, on the second day, the fine increases to $50,000 — and so on and so forth. According to the judge verbal decision from the bank and several other court documents, the minimum amount of penalties is $25,000, and the amount will multiply exponentially each day of the week until Jones sits and speaks. Saturdays and Sundays are excluded. The last possible date for a sanction is April 15, the judge said.
Jones’ attorneys filed several documents after Wednesday’s hearing asking the judge to do so rethink the matter and who then informed the court that the matter would be heard at higher levels.
The filing late Wednesday argued in part that further depositions were already being planned in the ongoing Sandy Hook litigation and that it was unclear when plaintiffs’ attorneys would be available to accept Jones’ deposition. From the file:
Jones Defendants hereby respectfully request the Court to reconsider the commencement of Mr. Jones’ fine until April 10, 2022 on the grounds that no filing for Mr. Jones and other filings in his case have been deferred for four days in the Week is scheduled for April 4, 2022. This date includes depositions that will take place outside of the state where Mr. Jones was ordered to appear. Under the court’s order, by April 11, 2022, Mr. Jones would have to record $525,000 in fines – an amount that crosses the line between a coercive and a punitive measure, although he could seek reimbursement of those fines. In other words, the court effectively ordered Mr. Jones to post at least $525,000 in bail.
The $25,000 figure is the defense calculation for the probable penalties between April 1, the first payment due date, and April 8, when they are likely to be based on the scheduled date of deferred filing – which is now April 11. April is – would be discontinued.
Jones’ attorney said the contempt order could “Mr. Easily compelling Jones to produce daily liquid financial assets in excess of $100,000 per day if they wish – a difficult task for anyone.”
That Wednesday motion was quickly followed additional documents on Thursday which said the case was appealed to the state’s highest court. This paperwork asks a judge to stay the contempt judgment until the Connecticut Supreme Court considers the matter.
“Mr. Jones has agreed to appear in Connecticut on April 11, 2022 for a deposition at the plaintiffs’ attorney’s office submission shows. “He is requesting a stay of the financial sanctions order until April 11, 2022, as he understands that a failure to appear by that date would further compound his difficulties in the present case.”
It goes on:
The granting of this short stay does not disadvantage the plaintiffs in this case; will not result in a burden on the court or on the economy of justice and is necessary to avoid irreparable physical and economic harm to Mr. Jones – particularly where Mr. Jones has already notified plaintiffs’ counsel of his willingness to attend a deposition suggested. To deny this request for a meager Suspension of the court’s sanction decision would quite simply result in serious injustice.
In addition, Mr. Jones is likely to prevail on his appeal. The court’s March 30, 2022 order contradicts well-established Connecticut Supreme Court precedent that prohibits a civil contempt court from relying on an attorney’s representations in indirect contempt proceedings. Puff v. puff334 Verb. 341, 366 (2020). puff also places the burden of proving contempt on the party seeking a contempt order. ID. at 365. The plaintiffs unequivocally attempted to shoulder that burden through counsel’s representations, and the court unduly shifted the burden to Mr. Jones to prove why he should not be despised without requiring the plaintiffs to first shoulder their burden wear. puff forbids issuing contempt in such a manner. Thus, Mr. Jones is likely to prevail on his appeal.
The Sandy Hook defamation case was, according to a Case number of the Connecticut Supreme Court cataloging the matter. The promised Supreme Court filing related to this particular matter is not yet on the calendar, according to a Court website.
Read the judge’s order and the two Jones documents that followed:
[Photo by Jon Cherry/Getty Images.]
Do you have a tip we should know? [email protected]
https://lawandcrime.com/lawsuit/alex-jones-takes-sandy-hook-contempt-ruling-to-connecticut-supreme-court-balks-at-difficult-task-of-paying-more-than-100000-per-day-in-sanctions/ Alex Jones is taking the contempt verdict to the state Supreme Court