Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 4, 2022 - Depositions & Trials

03:14:30

Alex Jones Defamation Trial: Sandy Hook 'Hoax' Lawsuit - Day Six, Part Two

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	sad music sad music sad music sad music sad music sad music sad music sad music sad music sad music sad music
	Thank you.
	All right.
	I heard you may be seated.
	I heard somebody wanted to talk to me without the jury.
	Yes, Your Honor.
	I want to bring to the court's attention.
	On the record?
	Sure.
	Okay.
	I want to bring to the court's attention now that while Mr. Hesslin was on the stand, Alex Jones was on his radio show saying what I believe to be Pretty much, per se, defamatory statements of Mr. Heslin.
	And in addition to that, what he had to say about Mr. Hesselman in this process and even mentioned Mrs. Lewis's name, I believe goes directly to her claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
	And I am going to admit through her the video of Mr. Jones on his show, not 45 minutes or I want to bring that to the court situation now in case we need to talk about it so that the jury doesn't have to leave when I bring it out.
	All right.
	Are you going to have an objection?
	I haven't seen the clip.
	Is it the whole show that he'd like to bring in?
	It certainly isn't the whole show I'd like to bring in.
	I don't think it has any value except for the statement that I'm talking about and I can play that now.
	All right.
	Why don't you do that?
	Sure.
	please play that for us I thought it was an act when I saw some of the stuff on TV just because he came off his show so
	Let's just say I've got family members that are really smart in a lot of ways,
	but they're just real kind of quiet and have this way about them and they move at different paces.
	Like they're fast in some ways and slow in others and he's...
	I mean, I think Hesselman acts like somebody on the spectrum.
	And it makes me feel like an even bigger jerk.
	But when I saw him, I'm like, there's something about this guy.
	This doesn't look.
	And now that I've been around him for over a week, I'm like, okay.
	Now I know.
	And look, folks, I don't have some calculated point, just bringing that up here.
	It's just that I'm around these people, and I'm looking at it, and I'm watching what's being said and what's going on, and it really then makes it clear what happened.
	I think this goes to direct evidence of her emotional, of her intentional inflection of emotional distress.
	It goes to punitive damages and there's a number of different ways that it goes to both of those and I would like to play that during her further direct examination.
	I've been told that it goes on and he says that he's sorry and we'd ask that the entire department.
	Spit your gum out, Mr. Jones.
	It's not gum.
	What is it?
	Because you're not allowed food or gum of any kind in the courtroom.
	I had my tooth pulled a week and a half ago, and I had some gauze in there earlier, and it's been causing me to have some pain.
	So you're chewing on your gauze?
	Would you like to show you?
	No, I just want you to answer my question.
	I was massaging the whole of my mouth with my tongue.
	I don't want to see the inside of your mouth.
	Oh no, there's no gum.
	Hold.
	Sit down.
	Do you want to play the rest of it to see if you'll...
	I mean, if we're going to go on this path, it could go on all day.
	I don't want to play it because defaming someone and continuing this whole saga and then saying, I'm sorry, is an optional completeness.
	I agree with that.
	You haven't seen it.
	You don't know what it says.
	I'm not going to play it.
	If you are not prepared to play it.
	So, your request would be denied at that time, I guess.
	Or now.
	I can deny it now.
	We're not going to play...
	I'm not going to play anything extra that I haven't seen, that you haven't seen, that you're not prepared to show me.
	We don't know what it says.
	I would object to playing of any tape, your owner.
	I think that it just injects Error into this record.
	There's no purpose to it.
	I object.
	And I object also that, you know, I haven't been given adequate notice or been able to receive the whole tape to see what other things should be played as well.
	Well, it's hard to give you more notice when it just was created today.
	That's about as much notice as you can get, I think.
	So that is certainly overruled as far as an objection.
	The other objections...
	I don't know what objection there is no purpose to it is.
	I guess relevance.
	It's definitely relevant.
	So, the objection is to relevance.
	What I'm reading into what you said is overruled.
	The objection is to notice is overruled.
	We've also had other It's made during this trial and how there doesn't have to be any more notice than it's made, it's new, that's the notice.
	I don't know.
	Let's see what the testimony is and how we continue.
	Are we ready?
	I'm ready, Your Honor.
	Alright, Ms. Sussman, can we come back up here please?
	I'm named Ms. Lewis.
	I apologize.
	We're ready for the jury.
	We're ready.
	All right.
	All right.
	You may be seated.
	Mr. Ball and Mr. Lewis, are you ready to proceed?
	All right.
	You may do so.
	All right.
	Mr. Lewis, can we continue what we were talking about earlier?
	Yes.
	Before we do that though, are you pleased that you at least now finally get to look this man in the eye?
	Yes.
	Then I would like to put some context to what we are talking about before we can, okay.
	Okay, please if you would bring up Planeys Exhibit III, photograph from Jesse.
	Jesse Lewis, your son.
	Tell us about it.
	I'd like to share the story of when Jessie was born.
	And Neil shared a little bit of this earlier, but he was 11 pounds.
	So he was a c-section and the first time that I saw him I actually walked to the nursery and there were all these nurses gathered around the window taking pictures and I asked them what are you taking pictures of and they said there's this enormous baby and he's trying to crawl out of his bassinet so he had literally Crawled down to the bottom and he was trying to get out.
	And I like to share that story because that's how he was his entire life.
	He was larger than life.
	He was loud.
	He was bouncing off the walls.
	That's my first memory.
	Tell us more about Jesse.
	What was his personality?
	He was very bold.
	He was very old for his age.
	He would walk up to a group of people and he'd say, he'd introduce himself, a group of men.
	Hi, my name is Jesse Lewis.
	What's your name?
	He was very protective of his family.
	And I have a little farm.
	He would put on an army helmet that my friend had given him, and he would, we called it patrolling.
	He would walk along the walls, all the corners, and then wait for people to come in at the gate.
	And what was on the, let me ask him this way.
	What is your understanding of Jesse's last day?
	So Jesse is actually known for during his final few moments.
	The shooter came into, he shot his way through the glass doors of Sandy Hook Elementary School and then he made a left.
	And he shot his principal and guidance counselor.
	They were coming out of a meeting on the first door on the right of the hallway.
	Now, Adam Lanza had been to this school, so he knew the layout.
	He knew that this was the first grade hallway.
	And so they heard the gunfire.
	They came out of the room.
	They were murdered right outside of Jesse's classroom.
	And then he made a left into the classroom door and was firing adult height and hit his teacher, who he was standing right in front of, and then his gun either jammed or ran out of bullets.
	And during the short delay, he actually stood up to the shooter and he saved nine of his classmates' lives before losing his own.
	And for that, for that act of bravery, he was actually given a commander-in-chief funeral reserved for heads of state and returning war heroes.
	And Jesse was actually considered a war hero because his first grade classroom was a literal war zone.
	This man, through his show and his laws, has denied the very existence of your son, Jesse Lewis.
	How does it make you feel being able to come in today and tell him, to his face, your story?
	I wanted to tell you, to your face, because I wanted you to know that I am a mother, first and foremost.
	And I know that you're a father.
	And my son existed.
	You're still on your show today trying to say that I'm implying that I'm an actress.
	That I'm Deep State.
	You have, this week.
	And I don't understand.
	Truth.
	Truth is so vital to our world.
	Truth is what we base our reality on.
	And we have to agree on that to have a civil society.
	Sandy Hook is a hard truth.
	Hard truth.
	Nobody would want to ever believe that 26 Kids could be murdered.
	Nobody would ever want to believe that.
	I understand people not wanting to believe that, actually.
	I don't want to believe it.
	But I've, since that day, dedicated my life to keeping kids safe.
	It's our responsibility.
	I used to think it was the school's responsibility.
	It was actually our responsibility.
	And I've dedicated my life to that, and having a quarter of Americans Doubt that Sandy Hook happened or doubt the facts around Sandy Hook is not conducive to keeping our kids safe.
	It's not.
	And it's our responsibility to keep our kids safe.
	This happened almost 10 years ago.
	We've had over 350 school shootings since then.
	We have to keep our kids safe.
	Jessie was real.
	There's records of Jesse's birth, of me.
	I mean, I have a history.
	And there's nothing that you could have found.
	Because it doesn't exist that I'm deep state.
	It's just not true.
	I know you know that.
	That's the problem.
	I know you know that.
	And you keep saying it.
	You keep saying it.
	Why?
	Why?
	For money?
	Because you've made a lot of money while you've said it.
	I know you're...
	I mean...
	I know you believe me.
	And yet you're going to get...
	You're going to leave this courthouse and you're going to say it again on your show.
	You're saying no.
	You just did it.
	Over the break, Ms. Lewis...
	Hear what Mr. Jones had said on his show about what Mr. Heslin, or about Mr. Heslin and his testimony?
	Yes.
	I'm going to object your honor for all the reasons I stated before.
	It's an edited clip.
	I don't think it should be.
	It's a red.
	Ms. Heslin, you have a claim for Yes.
	And when this man says bad things and lies about your son's father, Mr. Hesslin, how does that affect you?
	It affects me because that is the father of my son.
	That is, you know, we're bonded forever through that connection, through Jesse, through Jesse's spirit.
	And, uh, That impacts me.
	If you have the capacity to put yourself in my shoes, do you have empathy?
	Because the two people that work for you don't seem to have empathy or care.
	They really don't.
	I was looking for some caring.
	I did not see it.
	Do you?
	Ms. Lewis, does it continue to cause you emotional distress when you hear this man Peddle the thought that you are in some way or another an actor or controlled by other people or like thoughts.
	Or that Sandy Hook was a total hoax.
	That it was a false flag.
	That it never happened.
	That there were no children killed.
	And you know that's not true.
	You know that's not true.
	But when you say those things, there's a fringe of society That believe you.
	That are actually dangerous.
	The video that you saw over break from Mr. Jones' website, radio show, Info Wars, did that cause you or affect you emotionally further?
	Absolutely.
	If we could please.
	What exhibit will this be, Melissa?
	PBX 32?
	Please play PBX. We offer PBX 32 to Edley, Your Honor.
	Objection rule.
	The objections are overruled.
	I, however, think that you need to establish a little bit more about this video.
	When it was aired, etc.
	Sure.
	While you were on break, did part of your team download this video?
	Yes.
	And are you aware that the video was created during or shortly after Mr. Heslin's testimony?
	Yes.
	And did that video come from the InfoWars website?
	Yes.
	And did you personally see that the video came from the InfoWars website?
	Yes.
	PBX 32 is admitted.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	Please play that voice.
	I thought it was an act when I saw some of the stuff on TV just because he came off his show.
	Let's just say he's a nice man and He's not an act.
	He is manipulated by some very bad people.
	But I'll just say, because I've got to be honest, he's slow, okay?
	And his ex-wife is not.
	I don't think he's stupid.
	I'm just saying he's...
	I've got family members that are really smart in a lot of ways, but they're just real kind of quiet and have this way about them, and they move at different pace.
	Like, they're fast in some ways and slow in others, and he's...
	I mean, I think Hanslin acts like somebody on the spectrum.
	And it makes me feel like an even bigger jerk.
	But when I saw him, I'm like, there's something about this guy.
	This doesn't look...
	And now that I've been around him for over a week, I'm like, okay.
	Now I know.
	Folks, I don't have some calculated point, just bringing that up here.
	It's just that I'm around these people, and I'm looking at it, and I'm watching what's being said and what's going on, and it really then makes it clear what happened.
	How does it make you feel knowing that that was said today by this man on his radio show while Jesse's father was testifying in that same seat you're sitting in?
	I've had a hard time finding words today.
	It makes me feel astounded in a bad way.
	It's horrific.
	horrific horrific tell us if you would please What are your last memories?
	just so I'm a single mom and I work full-time and so mornings are hectic with two boys getting them out the door
	Neil was picking up Jesse that morning and so I bundled him up, brought him outside, walked him outside to meet Neil and We were going to make gingerbread houses with him, with their class at 2 p.m.
	that day.
	So that was, I never, it worked a lot.
	And so I had taken the afternoon off that day.
	And so Neil and I were finalizing the, you know, I'll meet you at the school for the gingerbread houses.
	And I turned around to give Jesse a hug.
	And I noticed that he had written in the frost on the side of my car.
	This is Connecticut.
	December 14th is very cold.
	I love you.
	With his fingernail in the frost.
	And he'd drawn hearts in all my windows.
	And I knew that that was one of life's special moments.
	And so I told him, even though running late, he's late, stay right here.
	I'm going to go get my cell phone.
	I ran into the house, got my cell phone, came back out.
	I remember taking him by the shoulders, positioning him so he'd be right by his message, taking a picture.
	I remember it was overexposed, so I deleted it.
	And then I took another picture, and then I took a close-up picture of the I love you.
	And then I gave him a hug.
	And sent him home.
	To school.
	That was the last picture that was ever taken of him, and that was the last time I ever saw him.
	Was Jesse honored for his heroism that day?
	He was.
	He was honored for his heroism at his funeral.
	He was given a commander-in-chief funeral, and my last memory really is driving him to the grave site and my last memory really is driving him to the grave site from where we held the funeral at a church to the actual graveyard.
	I was in a car behind The hearse that contained the casket, and I was in the car with my son and a couple other family members, and we had a, I guess it's called a calvacade, or multiple motorcycles in full uniform were in front of us and behind us.
	Lots of first responders showed up from multiple different states.
	To honor his bravery.
	And so they would, when we approached an intersection, the back would come up to the front and they would block off the intersection.
	And cars, just a line of cars, pulled over to the side.
	People had gotten out of the cars.
	They were kneeling on the ground, praying, saluting.
	For his bravery.
	And that's a special memory.
	How does this man's lies interrupt those memories?
	I mean, because then Alex gets on there and says that it didn't happen.
	That it was a false flag.
	That there were no kids killed.
	And you cater to those people that That are not grounded in reality.
	You're not telling the truth.
	You know the truth as a father.
	And as someone that said they researched Sandy Hook.
	There was lots of things on there.
	And so to come on and say that Jesse never existed, that That it was a hoax?
	That it was a hoax?
	I know there are hoaxes that are out there, but this was an incredibly real event.
	And I lived it.
	And it's unbelievable that you would continue to say that it didn't happen.
	How does it affect your grieving process?
	what a mother has to go through when she loses a son.
	Having a six-year-old son shot in the forehead in his first-grade classroom is unbearable, unbearable.
	Unbearable.
	You don't think you're going to survive.
	But there are people that have.
	And then to have someone on top of that perpetuate a lie.
	A lie.
	That it was a hoax.
	That it didn't happen.
	It was a false flag.
	That I'm an actress.
	And you get on and you say, oh sorry, but I know actresses when I see them.
	Do you think I'm an actress?
	No, I don't think you're an actress.
	No, you can't talk right now.
	Sorry.
	I did.
	I asked him a question.
	You get to testify right now.
	You're under oath.
	Nobody else in the room is.
	Anyway...
	And I think...
	I don't think you understand the fear that you perpetuate To not just the victims' families, all of us, and others, but our family, our friends, every survivor from that school.
	The ripple effect is enormous because of the platform that you have.
	And the fear that comes from that, the fear stops the healing and the mourning process because you're afraid.
	I don't think the two can happen at once.
	I don't think that you can heal from the loss of your child and be afraid at the same time.
	The fear stops everything.
	How do you recover?
	from someone saying your child wasn't murdered?
	I don't think you can recover.
	I don't think you do recover.
	Unless it stops, unless it's retracted, unless there's accountability and responsibility.
	And that hasn't happened.
	What you've seen today, the video today, what does that do to your hope for this man's accountability and responsibility for it?
	I don't understand.
	I don't understand.
	I cannot even make sense.
	That's one of the problems.
	I can't make sense out of nonsense, out of why you would say it didn't happen.
	It's not happening.
	I'm an actress.
	I'm part of the deep state.
	It's a hoax.
	It was a false flag.
	It never happened.
	There were never any children.
	I don't understand.
	Yeah, I'm stuck.
	One of the things that you've done is one of the things that you have done Miss Lewis to aid in your recovery is the choose loved ones.
	Yes.
	See on your necklace there you've got I have Nurturing Healing Love.
	Right.
	Yes.
	And that is part of the Choose Love movement?
	It's actually why I started the Choose Love movement.
	If you could, tell us what the Choose Love mission is.
	Yeah.
	When I did come home to my house, I saw a message that Jesse had left on our kitchen shop floor shortly before he died.
	He had written three words.
	Alex, I want you to hear this too.
	He'd written three words, nurturing, healing, love.
	This is what Jesse wrote on our kitchen chalkboard.
	Three words, nurturing, healing, love.
	Phonetically spelled because he was in first grade and just learning to write.
	But I looked at those words and I found a solution for what had happened.
	I knew that if Adam Lanza Had been able, Adam Lanza is the former, recent student, recent graduate of Sandy Hook Elementary, the Newtown school system, if he had been able to give and receive nurturing, healing, love, the tragedy would never have happened.
	And so I dedicated my life to spreading that message, have it on my body at all times.
	I believe it was a spiritual awareness that he had, that he wasn't going to be on Earth very much longer, and he wanted to leave a message for his family and friends of comfort, but also inspiration.
	I believe that that message is where we need to turn in order to survive, survive and thrive, keep our kids safe.
	It helped me determine how it's going to respond, knowing that we are responsible for our children's safety.
	That what we had been doing wasn't working.
	Obviously, my son was dead.
	And so I decided to take a completely different course.
	I decided to address the root cause of the pain that led up to Adam Lanza doing what he did.
	The root cause of the isolation, loneliness, pain, suffering, bullying, Even the root cause of substance abuse and a lot of mental illness.
	And so I started the Jesse Lewis Choose Love movement.
	And I started that movement in...
	I mean, we say it started at Jesse's funeral because I got up and I talked about...
	I talked about How an angry thought started that whole tragedy and that an angry thought can be changed.
	And I asked everybody to choose a loving thought over an angry thought and that changed people's lives.
	And so I took that foundation and Jesse's message and his courage that he showed And I created a movement.
	I wanted it to be a place where, because there was so much polarization after Sandy Hook, it was polarized into anti-gun, pro-gun.
	That was the conversation.
	All the blame went on Adam and his mom, and that didn't make sense to me.
	Because if it was all their fault, it would never have happened before, obviously, and it would never happen again.
	So I wanted to create a space where everyone could come together and what we all have in common, even you and I, the want and need to love and be loved.
	We're all the same in that.
	And so I created the Choose Love Movement because I wanted to bring both of the sides together.
	Of course, we're more Polarize now than we ever have been as a country.
	You know that.
	Some of that is because of you.
	And I am trying to bring us all together in what we're the same in, which is the want and need to love and be loved.
	All of us are the same in that.
	All of us feel pain.
	You've felt pain in your life.
	I know I have too.
	And we have to teach our kids how to process that pain so that They don't turn into an Adam Lanza, and they don't take it out on other people.
	And that's what the Choose Love Movement does.
	It's free programming for schools, homes, and communities.
	It's comprehensive.
	There's nothing else like it out there.
	And that's what I've done every day since I started this, which is very shortly after The funeral is I focus on the Choose Love movement and I focus on being part of the solution.
	Have you made it your life goal?
	Yeah, it's absolutely my life goal to make sure that our children are safe and to safeguard their safety and well-being.
	It's our responsibility.
	I didn't know that before the tragedy.
	I'm a single mom, both my son's safety was my responsibility, and I knew that, but I wasn't aware that our children's safety, our children's, including your six-year-old son or daughter, is our responsibility, and we have to do something to safeguard them, especially in schools.
	Keep our money safe.
	We need to keep our kids safe.
	And that is my life's goal.
	I know that your organization has created some informational material.
	Would it aid you in your explanation of the jury with further goals and the way that this works if we showed it to them?
	It would.
	Okay.
	If we could.
	I object your honor under rule 403 of yours.
	That would be overruled.
	If we could please go ahead and play that video.
	Love those moves.
	Awesome, Jess!
	It is August 24, 2012. And Jess has brand new soccer shoes.
	So prior to 12-14, 2012, I was a single mom with two boys.
	It was kind of an unremarkable life.
	It was such a great life.
	You know, I just wanted to be a mom, and I just wanted to be with my kids.
	Run the ball out to me!
	One day, you're a mom with two boys, one boy riding in a car seat in the backseat.
	So one morning, I'm holding hands with my six-year-old in his car seat, and the next thing that I know, there is no six-year-old.
	he's been murdered So I had come home for the first time and I was getting Jesse's clothes for the funeral.
	And I walked through the kitchen on my way out and I noticed these three words that Jesse had written on the kitchen chalkboard shortly before he died.
	He wrote, nurturing, healing, love.
	These words were a message of comfort for his family and friends and inspiration for the world is where we needed to turn.
	and I knew I'd be spending the rest of my life spreading this message.
	Thank you.
	Jesse is a part of this organization.
	I actually believe that he's leading it.
	and all I have to do is just be present.
	I live with a tremendous dichotomy in my life every single day.
	It's never out of my mind why I am leading a worldwide movement to choose love.
	It's been...
	This has been going since 2013?
	Yes.
	Has it been a way for you to try to continue to heal?
	It has, yes.
	How has what this man I have literally dedicated my life to trying to keep kids safe and to spread a message that we can thoughtfully respond
	in any situation, circumstance, or interaction by choosing love.
	And you are spreading lies and fear and falsehoods and deception and untruths.
	There is a truth.
	And I believe that you know it.
	And this is so important.
	I feel like we're at odds with our missions.
	I'm trying to spread love.
	I'm trying to keep kids safe.
	Because I couldn't do it for my own.
	And you're saying that it didn't happen.
	And you're taking away the credibility of what I'm trying to do.
	A quarter of Americans believed that San Diego didn't happen, or they doubt the facts surrounding it.
	And you continue to peddle that conspiracy theory.
	That is not conducive to keeping our kids safe.
	It's not conducive to keeping our kids safe.
	That's...
	The way that you have used choose love to help yourself heal, has what Alex's lies, the lies that he has given you, has that interrupted that healing?
	It has.
	It has.
	because you can't heal when you're afraid.
	There have been a couple questions that have been asked in this room about apology versus money or compensation for damages.
	You've heard those questions?
	Yes.
	Talk to me about apology and compare that to paying for the damage that has been caused.
	The way you feel about those two.
	Well, first of all, there has not been a sincere apology.
	But if there was, ever, I liken it to being in a car accident And you run over someone and cause tremendous bodily damage.
	And you look at that person lying on the ground and say, I'm so sorry.
	I'm so sorry.
	But I'm not accountable or responsible for any of the damage that I just caused.
	But I'm sorry.
	That's how I see it.
	Would you, at this moment in time, when you're sitting on that stand, now be at the stage where you would be able to accept an apology?
	Would it mean anything to me?
	No.
	No.
	As to the other side of this, the damages that this man, that you're asking this man to pay for, why are you asking for those damages?
	What do you hope will be accomplished?
	I'm going to object 41-11 now.
	Overruled.
	I have a continuing objection to this board of testers.
	Sure.
	Alex has been asked to stop, and he hasn't.
	He's still doing it today.
	You've been doing it last week, every day, this week, or at least, I don't know, shows you've had.
	While you should be in here, you've been on your show, and you've been talking about this.
	Your counterpart has been talking with you about this.
	And so you're not going to stop.
	Thank you.
	I don't even think my pleading with you up here is going to get you to stop.
	And all of the damage that you caused, the fear that you've put people in, from your following, The way that you've impacted so many lives, I think that there has to be accountability for that.
	I don't think you understand.
	I think you know that Sandy Hook is real and that it happened.
	I know you're shaking your head no, but I know that you think that it's real.
	I know that you know that it's real, but I don't think that you understand at all Because the people that work for you don't understand the repercussions of going on air with a huge audience and lying and calling this a hoax and a false eye.
	You don't understand the repercussions to individuals' lives.
	You don't understand the net that is cast in a negative way.
	You don't understand that.
	You don't understand.
	And I don't think you will understand.
	Unless there's some form of punishment that is significant that would make you understand that this is real.
	This isn't staged.
	Like one of your people said, this is a real event.
	It seems so incredible to me that we have to do this.
	That we have to Implore you.
	Not just implore you.
	Punish you.
	To get you to stop lying.
	Saying it's a hoax.
	It happened.
	It's like surreal what's going on in here.
	I think everyone in here probably feels that way.
	Is that what you hope to accomplish?
	Yes.
	Through this process?
	Yes.
	Yes, I hope to accomplish an era of truth.
	An era of truth.
	Please.
	How difficult has it been for you waiting for this day, literally for this very moment where you're sitting in that chair right now, this reality, how difficult has it been for you waiting for that?
	In some way, you've impacted every single day of my life, negatively, almost since Jesse's murder.
	Since 2013, when Your videos were going around in my mom's house about starting to say that this didn't happen.
	And I'm so glad that this day is here.
	I'm actually relieved because and grateful to everybody that's here in service.
	to our society and I'm grateful that I got to say all this to you and that I got to speak my truth and I just I'm really looking forward to this being over so that I can get back to healing and spreading my message,
	spreading And I want to thank you for representing us.
	Mr. Reynolds, do you have any questions for Ms. Lewis?
	Good afternoon, Ms. Lewis.
	Good afternoon.
	I read your book, "Nurturing, Doing, Love," and I thought it was a beautiful book.
	Thank you.
	And something that any parent who's lost a child should have.
	Thank you.
	I hope that you will use your power of choice to see the good and the questions that I'm going to ask you.
	In your book, you describe how after Jesse's murder by Anna Lanza, you went on the journey And even before you said that you had read a book called You Can Heal Yourself by Louise Hayes.
	Yes.
	And that you educated both JT and Jesse in their power to choose how they would react and view life.
	Yes.
	And that sometimes you You'd say, you know, you have the power to, and then Jessie would say, yeah, Mom, I know.
	Choose, choose, choose.
	Yes.
	In the aftermath of the shooting, there were more than 500,000 letters of condolences that were sent to you.
	Yes, and mostly by little kids.
	And drawings.
	And drawings.
	Shortly after the shooting, you...
	You participated in an EMDR session?
	Yes.
	And during that session you described a tunnel of light.
	Should we explain what that is?
	Well EMDR is something that Dr. Crouch testified about.
	Yes.
	And it is a process whereby there's bilateral stimulation and visualization of bad memories.
	Yes.
	And you described seeing a tunnel of life.
	I don't remember that.
	Can you read in my book where it says that?
	Well, maybe this will remind you.
	Okay.
	And if not, we can go to the book.
	Sure.
	But you described seeing the children who've been murdered ascending into heaven.
	Yes.
	And a dark figure.
	Yes.
	And that dark figure was Annamalai's.
	Yes.
	And the therapist that was helping you asked you what you wanted to do with him.
	Yes.
	And you sent him up to heaven too.
	Yes.
	Later you spoke to the bipartisan task force on gun violence prevention and children's safety.
	I don't remember that, but I'm sure I did.
	It was sort of the first time you've been able to introduce Jesse's message of choosing love to the world.
	Are you referring to the part in my book?
	Yes.
	And you got a standing ovation?
	Yes.
	You met President Obama?
	Yes.
	He came to the funeral?
	No.
	You met him in Newtown right after?
	Yes.
	Three days after.
	He was speaking in Newtown.
	You went to see him in Washington?
	Yes.
	And then he gave a speech at Hartford University, do you recall?
	Yes.
	And you met with him after the speech?
	Yeah, in the hallway.
	And you told him about your message?
	Yes.
	And he was very taken with the idea?
	Yes.
	And he gave you a hug?
	Yes.
	And he said that he would introduce you to his sister?
	Yes.
	Yes.
	And you went and visited with her?
	Yes.
	And she gave you tickets to go and meet the Dalai Lama?
	Yes.
	And you went to see the Dalai Lama with several friends?
	Yes.
	And were able to meet with him personally afterwards?
	Well, he walked by me and we had an interaction.
	And he hugged you?
	He did.
	And that must have been very special?
	Since then, you've often spoken about Jesse's story.
	Yes.
	And you've said that although Jesse's death could have destroyed me, hope, love, forgiveness, and faith will save me.
	Yes.
	You wrote...
	On that day, the world became one.
	On that day, the world chose love.
	I said, but we have to keep that going through awareness and education.
	Nurturing, healing, love.
	Getting that message to the world is the reason Jesse was put on earth.
	Yes.
	He died for it.
	Yes.
	Your book was published in late 2013, early 2014?
	October 2013. About ten months after the show.
	Yeah, it was about the first six months of my healing process.
	Would you agree with me that in the book you don't discuss Alex Jones or any kind of posters?
	Absolutely not.
	Absolutely not?
	You don't agree?
	No, no, I'm sorry.
	I did not.
	Before...
	The controversy that arose from the Megyn Kelly interview.
	Had you taken time to watch Alex's show?
	No, I did not.
	Who brought to your attention what had happened on the Megyn Kelly show and the subsequent Owen Schroyer?
	Neil did.
	Have you chosen to watch the entirety of the videos that have been presented in evidence here?
	I have not.
	You would agree that it's our jury's job to decide the case based on the facts and evidence?
	Yes.
	You have spoken your truth today and your, I think, very honest belief that Alex, from the very beginning, victimized your family and yourself.
	Yes.
	Wouldn't watching the broadcast be the best way to know whether that was the case or not?
	I had seen enough. - Projection, Your Honor.
	Back to the thought, when we tell you that he has done that.
	So ask that question as soon as it hasn't.
	Hang on.
	So, I guess you're...
	Alright.
	I am going to strike the question And the answer, because they go to an issue that's already been decided.
	Can that be heard?
	So you can try and rephrase it in some other way to get to whatever you're trying to get to, but not that way.
	We, I believe you testified about a picture of the Super Bowl.
	I did.
	With the names of the victims of Sandy Hook written on top of the photograph of the children who sang it.
	Yes.
	Is your basis for testifying that InfoWars pushed that picture that somebody told you I know that Infowars has given a platform to the conspiracy theorists that say that Sandy Hook never happened.
	I would agree with that, but my question is, is your basis for saying that Infowars either displayed that photograph or pushed that photograph somewhere based on something somebody told you?
	No.
	Did you yourself see that picture being pushed by on any kind of Infowars broadcast?
	Yeah.
	The video we saw played earlier.
	Which one?
	The video of Alex that was represented as having been taken today.
	Yes.
	Was just that clip given to you or did you watch the entire broadcast?
	I watched that clip.
	Did anybody tell you what was said before or after that clip?
	No.
	Who provided you with the clip?
	My team pulled it up.
	My son pulled it up and showed it to me.
	Was he the one who created the clip, or did somebody else create it?
	I don't know.
	No, my son was not.
	No, I don't know who created the clip.
	Do you know who gave the clip to your son?
	He found it on the internet.
	Oh, I understand.
	Let me ask you about Plaintiff's Exhibit 131. I think it's in front of you.
	Yes.
	And that is the email from Wolfgang Halbig?
	Yes.
	That email is dated September 9th, 2019.
	Is that correct?
	That's correct.
	Are you aware that as of that date, it had been several years since Wolfgang Halbig had been on the Infowars show or Alex's show?
	No, it's not aware.
	And plaintiff's exhibit 128 was an attachment to that email.
	Yes.
	As you sit here today,
	do you know any way that Infowars could have known in 2014 or 2015?
	when Halvig was on the show that he would go this first?
	- That's a good question. - Sustained.
	- Lucy Richards.
	- I was gonna say, I don't think they checked his credentials.
	- May I respond to that?
	Sustained it.
	- You know what lawyers can do.
	You can ask another question.
	You can make an argument to me about something.
	I'm not telling you how to do this.
	Were you present for the testimony of Adan Salazar by deposition?
	Was I present, like, in the room?
	Oh, yes, yes.
	And so you saw that he testified that Maybe he could have done a better job, but that he did look into Wolfgang Hallig's credentials at the time.
	I saw that he did just a surface scratch of looking into his credentials.
	Lucy Richards, she's the woman who left the terrifying message that we heard.
	Yes.
	She, thankfully, has never left a message like that for you.
	Correct.
	Lucy Richards She has never worked for InfoWars, has she?
	She is a devout follower of InfoWars.
	I don't know that she's ever worked for InfoWars.
	I don't know.
	In fact, she's just a crazy woman, isn't she?
	Seemingly so.
	And there are crazy people in Georgia.
	That's correct.
	and sometimes they see things on television or they hear things on the radio, and they do crazy things.
	You testified about Dan the Gandhi.
	Did I? I believe you were asking questions about Dan Badandi coming to film a town hall meeting at Newtown.
	Do you recall that?
	Questions I was asked?
	Yes.
	I don't remember, so I'm sorry, can you read?
	As I sit here today, do you know the name Dan Badandi?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Have you ever had any personal contact with them?
	No.
	I know what you're talking about.
	The mayor that would send out the emails telling us to stay home when they were in town, correct?
	Yes.
	Correct.
	Yes.
	And so, you said, I believe, or perhaps Mr. Ball said, Dan Dondi and others.
	Yes.
	The term, and others.
	Yes.
	There were no other Infowars people in Newtown, were there?
	I don't know.
	You testified that a man pulled into your driveway on Christmas Day.
	Yes.
	What year was that?
	I don't remember.
	And the man took some photographs, You went outside and you said, can I help you?
	Yes.
	And he drove off?
	Yes.
	He scared you, but you really don't know why he was there.
	He was there to photograph my property.
	He took a picture of me standing on my porch.
	Are you still in therapy today?
	Yes.
	How often do you attend therapy?
	I travel a lot.
	And I have, I've maybe had, I've had many therapists and done many different kinds of therapies in the last 10 years.
	So I am currently in therapy.
	The different kinds that I have several times a month.
	So you have different types of therapy?
	I have different types of therapy, yes.
	Can you estimate for us how much you've spent on therapy since the tragedy at San Diego Delegantrie School in 2012?
	If you know, if you don't know, you can always say that you don't know.
	I don't know.
	I don't know.
	Less than $500,000?
	Yes.
	Less than $200,000?
	Less than...
	$50,000?
	I don't know.
	Um, the therapists that you are seeing now, how much do they charge you?
	She charges, I'm not, $150 an hour.
	And, and, so about how much per month would you say that you spend on therapy?
	Um, a couple hundred dollars.
	You're a published author.
	I am.
	And I think you've written three books.
	I have.
	A children's book and...
	Before the tragedy.
	And then since then you've written two.
	Nurturing Healing Love and Choose Love.
	It's about the movement and about the program and the history of that and how it can positively affect people.
	That's the third book.
	Yes?
	You work at your foundation.
	I do.
	And I think you have five or six employees?
	Yes.
	You've made many media appearances.
	Yes.
	Starting in 2013 and ongoing to the present day.
	Correct.
	You've appeared on CNN, yes?
	Yes.
	Various talk shows?
	Yes.
	You're also a motivational speaker?
	I speak for the Choose Love Movement.
	I speak to schools and parent groups.
	You speak to private organizations as well?
	I have on a limited basis.
	If one navigates to the Choose Love Movement website, one can find A place where one can make an inquiry for a private event.
	Yes.
	And it says you'll speak for two hours.
	I'll speak for as long as you will let me speak.
	And can you tell the members of the jury how much is this suggested honorarium for your speaking?
	It may be five thousand dollars.
	Would ten be more accurate?
	It could be ten.
	5 to 10.
	During this period that we've been discussing from 2013, at least Can I clear something up?
	100% of the proceeds of all three of my books, as well as 100% of the proceeds of everything that I do, including my speaking, go directly to the Choose Love movement.
	If an organization pays me, they do not write a check to me.
	They write a check to the movement.
	I just want to clear that up.
	The movement does, your 501 nonprofit does employ you as well?
	I am employed.
	I am a human being.
	I have expenses.
	I have to live.
	Yes.
	To my previous question, from 2013, from the day of the shooting until, let's say, this litigation began, no one at InfoWars, and certainly not Alex Jones, ever said your name?
	I don't know that.
	Have you asked?
	Have I asked InfoWars?
	Have you asked anyone, whether your name was ever mentioned?
	I guess I feel like it has been an association.
	And that's because you feel that by speaking about parents in general, that is a reference to you?
	It includes me, and I feel like it does.
	InfoWars has never published your photographs.
	Thank you.
	InfoWars has never published your photographs.
	Are these questions, Mr. Reynold?
	Have they?
	I don't know.
	Are you asking me or telling me?
	I'm asking you.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I don't know.
	And InfoWars has never directed anyone to harass you, is that true?
	I don't know.
	If they sent people to Sandy Hook, then they've definitely harassed people there.
	Well, in fairness, they sent...
	That's my community.
	And they don't know that I was not going to be around.
	Well, the people, the people, the person, Dan Badandi, went to a meeting that was set up to hear FOIA requests for information regarding the Sandy Hook.
	I don't know, but I did see him harass people on the way out.
	And I know the people that he harassed.
	Understood.
	That was an open government meeting.
	True?
	I don't know.
	I don't really know.
	I don't know what FOIA stands for.
	Freedom of Information.
	Okay.
	That was a meeting to address Freedom of Information Act requests made by Mr. Halbert.
	True?
	I don't know.
	I don't know what the meeting was about.
	Certainly a meeting like that Yes.
	Absolutely.
	All right.
	Mr. Paul?
	Briefly, Your Honor.
	Kevin Lepratt and Will Turbot.
	Those are names of people who were with Mr. Verdana.
	Are you aware of that?
	Yes, I saw other people there.
	there, I wasn't aware of their names.
	So to say that Mr. Badandi was the only person that went to Newtown would not only be misleading, but it would be a lie, right?
	It wouldn't make a lot of sense to put that man in your book, would it?
	No.
	So I assume that's why he did it.
	Not because of our healing.
	Hopefully you can begin that after today.
	Thank you.
	Mr. Reynolds?
	It's fair to say, Ms. Lewis, that other than Mr. Badandi, you don't know who all went to that meeting.
	That's correct.
	Would it be relevant to you, as you sit here today after having answered those questions from your lawyer, to know whether or not Mr. Jones as you sit here today after having answered those questions from your lawyer, to know It's actually not relevant to me.
	I mean, Also, scope is sustained.
	Sustained.
	Alright.
	Now it is the jury's time.
	It's 2.47.
	We'll probably end up making this our mid-afternoon break as well, but let's do try to get the questions.
	If there are any, to me, Remember, all of my previous instructions, this is independent opportunity, no conversation, no research, all the same rules.
	You're excused.
	All rise.
	Is anyone else as cold as I am?
	Or are you guys comfortable?
	Because some of the fans can be turned down or off.
	Turn these two in the front off and we'll leave them on in the back.
	Oh, shut the door!
	I don't tell them.
	They don't shut it.
	You can sit down.
	Ms. Lewis, you can go back down to the council table.
	When we come back in, you'll need to be in the hall.
	Did you both get copies of version 2 of the charge?
	How has Jesse's passing affected your parenting of JT? How has Alex Jones and Infowars affected your parenting?
	How many lives has the Choose Love movement touched and how has it made them better?
	Would you include Alex Jones and his family in the Choose Love movement if he was inclined to join?
	Would you forgive Alex Jones if he truly apologized and compensated monetarily and stopped the propaganda on or off the InfoWars platform?
	So, not asking about her income, not asking about what she'll do with the money.
	Is it your opinion that InfoWars has a First Amendment right to say whatever they want about Sandy Hook?
	I mean, they don't.
	That's the law.
	There are some things you do not get to say.
	No objection.
	Alright, then Will?
	I think it just confuses the issue.
	If it were about free expression or something like that, it would be different.
	There is any party that has introduced the idea, what are you chewing?
	Nothing.
	Seriously.
	No, you're absolutely right.
	I'm sure some people think I'm crazy about the gum, but it is like a foundational rule that you do not chew gum or eat in the courtroom.
	I agree.
	We live in a really casual society, but courts are serious.
	The business we do is serious.
	And sometimes that means We practice things that might, in another context, not have as much meaning, including rules about gum and food and dress and decorum and taking turns and those kinds of things.
	So, it's important.
	Not as important as something, not as important as the substance, but the rules let us get to the substance.
	What I was going to say was, Mr. Reynold introduced the argument through your questions.
	You've asked, um, I don't know if they're transferring from, but you've asked a few witnesses about the First Amendment.
	Um, I don't know.
	I'm going to think about it for a minute.
	How has Jesse's passing affected your parenting of JT? How has Alex Jones and InfoWars affected your parenting?
	How many lives has the Choose Love movement touched and how has it made them better?
	Would you include Alex Jones and his family in the Choose Love movement if he was inclined to join?
	Would you forgive Alex Jones if he truly apologized and compensated monetarily and stopped the propaganda on or off the InfoWars platform?
	I think those are fair.
	Are there any objections to any of the last set?
	I'm going to miss out of the room now.
	I don't know.
	I don't know.
	You object to the question?
	I do your question.
	Alright.
	I'm not going to ask it.
	I think it's on the edge.
	It asks for her opinion, First Amendment, what it allows.
	It's not really a matter of opinion.
	She's not a lawyer.
	I think we're ready.
	On the record, we have gone through the questions submitted by the jury, eliminated Half of them kept half.
	The ones that you know I'm going to ask.
	Any objections, Mr. Ball?
	None, Your Honor.
	Any objections, Mr. Reynold?
	None.
	All right.
	And then we are ready for Ms. Lewis and Ms. Magic Still.
	we're ready for the jury.
	Okay, you just come back up to the stand, please.
	I'm bringing the jury in.
	Okay.
	All right.
	All right.
	All right, you may be seated.
	I think I forgot to give you the same reminder with Mr. Husson's question, so I'll give it here now for then and now.
	If you don't hear your question, that's because I made the decision that it wasn't appropriate for some reason, so you don't have to write your frustration with me.
	Now, Ms. Lewis, I am going to ask you a number of questions, and I'm going to ask you to respond to them to the jury.
	And if you'll just listen carefully and answer the question, I can't explain it, so you just have to answer the question as it is, okay?
	How has Jessie's passing affected your parenting of your other son, JT? That's a good question.
	It has impacted my parenting, obviously.
	I think that when you have one son that's murdered, you want to bubble wrap the other son so that they never feel pain, and that's obviously impossible.
	And I think that I've done that a bit with JT, trying to be overly solicitous and trying to keep him safe.
	And...
	How has Alex Jones and Infowars affected your parenting?
	I think that question relates to the first question.
	As a parent, it's your responsibility to keep your kids safe.
	And I wasn't able to do that with my first child, and so I am so probably overly zealous in trying to do that with JT. And so I've taken measures that might seem over the top to some, but to me, I don't want to fail.
	My surviving son.
	And I know consciously that I even failed Jesse when he was murdered at Sandy Hook because he was where he was supposed to be by law.
	But you have a little bit of guilt.
	That you sent them to school that morning.
	And so I think that it is definitely impacted by parenting.
	And it's negatively I would say, unfortunately.
	I think that he would agree.
	But I was doing the best that I could with the skills and tools that I had at the time, and I continued to get more.
	How many lives has the Choose Love movement touched, and how has it made them better?
	The Choose Look movement has impacted millions of lives all over the world.
	In fact, our last conservative estimate was over three and a half million children that have received this type of essential life skills programming, this type of programming that enabled them to Thoughtfully respond to any situation, circumstance, or interaction by choosing love.
	We have a powerful formula that we teach.
	And this formula leads you, it's a pathway to flourishing.
	And it starts with courage.
	Courage to tell the truth.
	Courage to be present with whatever is happening in your life.
	The courage to do the right thing.
	And gratitude is the next formula.
	It's the courage to be grateful even when things aren't going your way.
	I try to live my life this way.
	And then forgiveness.
	And it's the courage to forgive even when the person who hurt you isn't sorry, doesn't care, or may not even know.
	And then compassion in action, which is The courage to step outside of your own pain and suffering.
	Even your own busyness and distraction to help other people.
	And then the beautiful thing is when you help other people, that helps and heals yourself.
	And I have certainly felt that.
	These are just some of the things that we teach kids.
	And this type of programming It was priced out of the market for my son.
	The school that he went to, when I asked them about this type of programming, they said they spent so much money on this type of program that they couldn't afford to train the teachers in this.
	And so I thought, wow, this would have saved my son's life.
	So I created a program and I made it free.
	Because every child, actually every parent, every grandparent, every human being should have access to these essential life skills that are backed by science and that we know can create a safer, more peaceful and loving world.
	Would you include Alex Jones and his family in the Choose Love movement if he was inclined to join?
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	Would you forgive Alex Jones if he truly apologized and compensated monetarily and stopped the propaganda on or off the InfoWars platform?
	I'm so glad you asked that question, whoever did.
	It's a great question.
	And forgiveness is something that I've learned so much about since the tragedy.
	And I didn't know much about before.
	And it's really instrumental in my own personal healing.
	And I think a lot of people are going to learn about it today with me speaking about it.
	But I actually...
	I have said that I forgive Alex.
	I've said that I forgive Adam Lanza.
	And I feel compassion for him.
	And I forgive Alex.
	And I feel compassion for you.
	But forgiveness...
	It starts with a choice and then it becomes a process.
	That doesn't mean that everything goes away, that you make this decision to forgive and then everything's okay.
	Forgiveness starts with a choice.
	Choose love.
	It is choosing love, forgiving.
	It starts with a choice, but then it becomes a process.
	And depending on who you are and your situation and your story and your level of pain, it is something that you might have to do every single day.
	It's a way to let go of some of the pain and to get your personal power back, to enable you to live your life.
	Forgiveness is a powerful healing tool, but It's something that I have to work on every day.
	And it doesn't mean that you don't hold the person that you're forgiving accountable.
	They're still responsible for what they did.
	It has nothing to do with accountability.
	This is maybe a bad example, but if someone was raped, you could forgive your rapist You have to hold them accountable.
	Because if you didn't, then they would continue doing that to other people.
	So you have some amount of responsibility in your forgiveness to continue to hold somebody accountable.
	Because if you don't, then they will continue.
	Ms. Lewis, thank you for your time and your testimony.
	We all appreciate it.
	At this time, you can go back down to where you've been sitting.
	Thank you.
	And somebody from the plaintiff's side?
	There's another witness for the jury.
	Your Honor, thank you very much.
	Mr. Reynold, it is your turn to present your case.
	Do you have a witness for the jury?
	I have a motion I need to make outside the presence of the jury, Your Honor.
	All right.
	This shouldn't take very long.
	Remember, my instructions are all still in place.
	Oh This is whoever's last Thank you.
	You may be seated.
	You may.
	Thank you.
	At this time, defendants would present their motion for directed verdict.
	Just make sure the door is shut.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Go ahead.
	At this time, defendants will present their motion for direct the verdict.
	We'll file same with the court, but I just wanted to give Your Honor a brief summary.
	It is our position that plaintiff's IIED claim fails as a matter of law.
	The evidence as adduced from the witness stand shows that it is predicated upon the statements made by Mr. Jones as well as his employees on the air and as such it is duplicative of the Deformation Plan and under Texas law shouldn't go forward.
	Either as to Ms. Lewis or as to Mr. Hesslund who also has a stand-alone defamation claim.
	As for the defamation claim itself, we believe that the evidence shows that the statements were not on the Owen Troy broadcast were not defamatory and so we think the owner should reconsider her decision.
	We urge that reputation damages have not been properly proven.
	In Anderson v.
	Durant, a Texas Supreme Court case, the court wrote that rumors within a community are not enough, and instead the evidence must show that people believe the statements and the plaintiff's reputation was actually affected.
	As to Mr. Heslin, who has the only reputation claim, we have no evidence of anybody who Deny him work, or denied him credit, or denied him access to some sort of social organization.
	So we think those should be stricken.
	We also would urge that the mental language damages are not properly proven.
	All right, thoughts?
	Yes, first with regard to the IED claim, the defendants first advance a gap filler argument, meaning that the claim sounds in defamation and it doesn't fill a gap in the law and can't be IED.
	First we would point out that this is already law of the case.
	Defendant Habs has appealed this on both of the claims, the U.S. Ann has one.
	Texas Supreme Court rejected that appeal.
	Texas Court of Appeals says they are not duplicative It is not a gap filler issue.
	Even if there wasn't already law of the case, The Mr. Huskins plan for defamation clearly sounded in statements about himself, while the two plaintiffs IED claim sounds in statements regarding the circumstance of their child's death.
	Those are, there are statements in which Mr. Jones made a full instance in which he did not claim that children were died.
	Instead, he claimed that the children were murdered as part of a two-year plea plan CIA plot.
	That does not actually affect their reputation whatsoever.
	It does not even accuse him of dying, but it is nonetheless That is also valid.
	With regard to reputational damages, the simple evidence alone that Mr. Hebsen testified that an individual, while yelling out Alex Jones and info, or spotted a fire bomb near his home, is clearly legally sufficient on its own to achieve reputational damages.
	But there's been plenty of testimonies about people in the community who have had negative thoughts about these parents, and in particular.
	And Mr. Hudson in particular.
	So for that reason, the reputation of false.
	As far as the mental anguish damage, I don't know a better way you can have legally sufficient evidence than by having two separate psychologists, a psychologist and a psychiatrist, one who has a formal diagnosis and who related it to these events, as well as the personal testimony of the plaintiffs about the poor mental life.
	As such, you believe the measure of the direct Any reply, Mr. Reynold?
	No, no.
	All right.
	The motion for a directed verdict is denied.
	Any other motions we need to take up outside the presence of the jury?
	I have a copy of...
	I couldn't hear.
	Say it again.
	You did what?
	I don't have any other motions, Your Honor, but I have a copy of the full clip to play for the jury of Mr. Jones' broadcast today.
	I have two versions.
	One of the versions has some remarks about The attorneys as well as the court.
	I didn't know if your owner wanted me to play that clip or one that has been edited to the fact.
	Our response is I think this is being offered for optional completeness.
	I'm not sure.
	I'm not sure either.
	Exactly.
	Okay, so let me...
	Okay, then if it is for optional completeness...
	It made within the recordings part that was played with the jury, while also identifying the specifics, and also identifying how that system existing on its own could be fundamentally misleading to the jury.
	And the portion that they would like to play that is necessary for the jury to properly understand what just happened.
	Otherwise, they will be misled.
	What I have heard is basically that after calling Mr. Heslin mentally challenged and autistic and claiming that his ex-wife and all of us lawyers are exploiting him, that then they want to play an apology or some other things that Mr. Jones says that they think will be good for them.
	That is not a way in which you actually clear up any fundamental needs in that video.
	Your Honor, the argument that's been made is that Mr. Jones continues on his show to deny that the plaintiffs are real, to say that they're actors, that they're some kind of a CIA plot.
	I mean, this seems to be a big part of the plaintiff's presentation, and it's just not true.
	And this clip shows, he says, these are real people.
	I've been sitting next to them.
	I'm sorry for what I did.
	And in that sense, their Their portrayal of it is misleading.
	So, I didn't actually hear any of that from Mr. Ball, so that's not their portrayal.
	I heard some testimony from Ms. Lewis about how she feels about it.
	Again, I don't think that constitutes a portrayal.
	I think, do you have, let me put it this way.
	I believe that Mr. Bankston is correct in how he describes the rule of optional completeness.
	Do you have an argument to make for why whatever portion of this video you think needs to be played is required for the jury to not be confused by the portion they heard earlier today?
	It's the argument I already made.
	And, you know, just to put it up, that the idea that he's saying that they're not, like, he wants to play it so he can show that Mr. Jones believes that they're real, literally said that in the video.
	Right, I did hear that as well.
	Also, the claim that he's been sitting next to them all week, I heard that also.
	I have a hard time imagining, and I have not watched it, that any clip that includes a conversation about what's happening in court this week can be in any way helpful to the jury in their job.
	Um, I've certainly...
	Can you please sit down, Mr. Jones?
	It is not your turn to talk.
	I will happily allow Mr. Reynold a minute to hear all of your suggestions if you and he think that is necessary.
	but you have to wait.
	I haven't watched any of it, so I don't know what it says.
	If you want to send it to me and have me watch it on a break, I will do that.
	But there are a number of people who have been writing to me and telling me what Mr. Jones is saying every day.
	I don't know if they're accurate or not in their descriptions.
	I'm not otherwise going to find out.
	So I will only see this if you send it to me and ask me to look at it.
	Would you like to confer with your client?
	I think he wants you to say something else. - I cut the three seconds off, I don't know if she is real, I cut that off, so she thinks I don't think she's real.
	She's totally confused, because they gave her a confusing clip.
	It's the definition of the law. - We'd simply re-urge that it's confusing for the jury because the clip leaves out the part where Mr. Jones says that he certainly believes that Ms. Lewis is right.
	Alright, so if you want to send me that part, That may in fact meet the requirements of the rule of optional completeness and send it to my staff attorney and she'll review it and then I'll review it on a break and I'll let you know.
	Thank you.
	Anything else before we bring the jury back?
	No, no.
	Anything from your side?
	All right.
	We're ready to have the jury back.
	All right.
	Mr. Reynold, do you have a witness?
	I do.
	The defense would call Alex E. Jones.
	All right, Mr. Jones, come stand in front of me, please.
	Raise your right hand.
	Do you solemnly swear or affirm, under penalty of perjury, that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
	Anu.
	Thank you.
	Come have a seat.
	In the witness chair there is water and glasses.
	You have pretty good volume.
	I don't think you'll need to lean into the microphone.
	I see that you have a document with you.
	I don't know if you were here when I explained to a prior witness who brought documents with them that you can't look at any document for any reason while you're testifying and go on unless one of the lawyers or myself instructs you to do so.
	So I'm going to ask you to actually just give it back to Mr. Reynold until he may think you need it, okay?
	I did, yes.
	Okay.
	While you testify, it is not a conversation.
	It is a question and answer.
	So the instructions are to let the lawyers completely finish asking their questions before you begin your answer.
	To listen to the question and answer what is asked.
	You can always say that you don't know or you don't understand if those things are true.
	To answer out loud in words and not head shakes and the like.
	I think that's That's all my instructions.
	I save so many times, sometimes I forget one thing, but I think those are all, do you understand them?
	I do.
	All right.
	You may begin, Mr. Reno.
	Alex, would you please introduce yourself to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury?
	Hi, I'm Alex Jones.
	How are you feeling today, Alex?
	I actually feel good because I get a chance to, for the first time, say what's really going on instead of the corporate media and high-powered law firms manipulating what I actually did.
	want to start by kind of letting the jury know a little bit about your youth and where you grew up so they can get to know you better.
	Is that okay?
	Okay and you know before we do that I just do want to say this on record as I've said it many times I apologize to both.
	Sustained.
	So, Mr. Jones, one of the instructions I just gave you is that this is not a conversation.
	Question and answer.
	So she got the monologue, but not me.
	I got it.
	And so you have to only answer questions that are asked of you.
	Mr. Raynaud will ask you, I'm certain, all the questions you want, except to wait for the question.
	You may proceed.
	Mr. Jones, have you been wanting to Apologize to the plaintiffs in this case for a long time.
	Yes.
	And what would you like to say to them?
	That I never intentionally tried to hurt you.
	I never even said your name until this case came to court.
	I didn't even really know who you were until a couple years ago when all this started up.
	The internet had a lot of questions.
	I had questions.
	And over that six, seven year period before I got sued, or six year period, it's clear you can see the whole progression of us, the few times we covered it, trying to actually find out what happened.
	And that's really been my big frustration is that people have said that I'm personally trying to hurt them or coming after them.
	When I question every big event, a lot of times it turns out that we've not been told the truth.
	And a perfect example is today where they play a one minute clip.
	And I had just done that this morning.
	And I knew that I said, I believe that Scarlett Lewis is real and she's a really nice person and she's really a sweet person.
	And then I went through and talked about her ex-husband too.
	And then I said, I believe they're being fed and manipulated.
	And this is a perfect...
	Sustained.
	Sustained.
	When you hear sustained you have to stop talking.
	Do you feel that the video clip was a fair representation of what you meant to convey?
	No, it had the front and back, no.
	And why wasn't it fair?
	Because it had the front and back cut off of Apology at the end and at the first where I said I believe she's a real person and lost her child.
	So someone edited that and then showed it to her and then they brought it in here and played it to show it to you.
	And I think you should ask to see the full segment.
	So now that we've got that out of the way, I want to ask you some questions about where you grew up and how you came to have your business.
	Let us know, where are you from in Texas originally?
	I first was born in Dallas, then I grew up in a suburb of Dallas called Rockwell.
	And how old were you when you moved to Austin?
	Sixteen.
	And can you tell the members of the jury why your family relocated to Austin?
	My dad sold his dental practice and there was too much crime in Dallas and Austin was a safer city.
	Were you still in high school when you moved to Austin?
	Yes.
	And did you graduate from high school here in Austin?
	Yes.
	And did you go to college?
	No.
	I mean, I went a few years to community college.
	Are you married?
	Yes.
	How many children do you have?
	I have four.
	Can you tell us their names and their ages?
	I've got to say their names.
	You don't have to if you don't want to.
	Well, there's Rex, who's 19, Charlotte, who's 18, Georgia, who's 14, and Veronica, who's 5.
	And is your wife present in the courtroom today?
	Yes, she's right there.
	And what's her name?
	Erica.
	I want to ask you some questions about how you got started out in media with your radio show, okay?
	How old were you when you first felt that you wanted to be on the air, that you wanted to work in media?
	When I was about 17 I really liked listening to talk radio.
	And I'd grown up with my dad on road trips listening to Larry King when he was still on radio.
	And I really liked Larry King on radio and then also on CNN.
	And I also liked Howard Stern, thought he was funny and I really wanted to be a talk show host.
	And how did you take that desire to be a talk show host and those early influences, how did you translate that into action?
	How did you first get on the air?
	I had been out of high school about a year and a half, two years, and I went down and took classes at the AXS TV station here in Austin, one of the first places to ever have AXS TV.
	They had one of the best systems.
	So they had a lot of equipment and a lot of studio space.
	A lot of it was old and equipped, but still very useful.
	So I became self-taught with that equipment.
	In about 94, 95, and then 95 started doing my own little call-in shows, and then those became pretty popular quickly.
	And so the phone rang, and a DJ by the name of Sharkman, who had a national show that was managing the local station, 98.9, said, I think you should come in and do like a three-hour radio show this Saturday and see what people think.
	And they had Howard Stern on their station.
	They had G. Ward and Lydia, a bunch of other big hosts.
	They had some other big local hosts who couldn't light the phone lines up.
	And the first time I went in, they got about 100 calls the first time.
	How old were you?
	I think I was 21, 22 by then.
	And what was the format of your early shows on Austin Public Access TV? It wasn't as conspiratorial or political.
	There was some of that, because there was other people doing those shows, and I already knew about that information.
	But it was just all over the map.
	It was just really calling shows with different topics.
	Did variety shows, like Carve Pumpkins on TV on Halloween, and you know, have a guy come in with his pet monkey and he dances around.
	Just fun stuff.
	Because I also liked Johnny Carson growing up.
	Did people like your show?
	They did.
	And did your show- it sounds like a Wayne's World kind of thing.
	I think Wayne's World is a good way to describe it.
	And did it win any accolades?
	It did.
	It won the best of Austin a few times on the newspaper and pretty much started getting written about and even national coverage within about two years.
	And so tell us, you've told us already about Larry King and about Howard Stern.
	Who would you say influenced you artistically in the format and how you did your show then and became the man you are today?
	I mean really, I listen to Larry King a lot because my dad listened to him on the radio a lot.
	When I was 6 or 7 I remember listening to Larry King.
	And then I'd watch him a lot of nights at home and junior high and high school.
	So I would say more than anybody, Larry King.
	And did there come a time when, because of your success and having won this Listener's Choice Award or Viewer's Choice Award, that you were able to be syndicated?
	Well, I won a couple of those.
	I don't think the syndication Did
	you know for us what the setup was like?
	Was it in a spare bedroom?
	It was.
	And what kind of furniture was in there?
	It was a simple wooden desk and a microphone and a little mixer and then a chair if I had a guest.
	And what is syndication for those of us that don't know?
	Instead of being on one station it goes up at that time to a satellite, now a lot of it's on the internet.
	And so you said you were syndicated on how many radio stations?
	It fluctuated between 30 or 40 at first, This
	is the issue of how I do what I think is right.
	Sometimes I'm wrong.
	I've been more right than wrong, but I don't do it for the monetary thing.
	I do it to tell the truth, or to try to tell the truth, and then the monetary comes with that because people can tell this guy's not reading all the script.
	And with that comes its own issues.
	But I'm not lying like the corporate media on purpose.
	That's the big difference.
	And so let's focus in on this early period.
	What year did you get syndicated?
	I syndicated myself in 1998.
	And at that time, did you already have the show name, "The Infowar"?
	Yes.
	No, no, it wasn't ever called Infowars, it was just The Alex Jones Show.
	Because you had to call the show your name, because that's how they did it with the ratings that were written in on little diaries.
	So, to be on radio, you had to say the name of the show coming in and out.
	It was like TV, for Nielsen ratings, so it was The Alex Jones Show.
	Tell us about Infowars.
	How did the name Infowars come to be, and how did that business start?
	Vic Freeland, who was an Air Force veteran, who worked in Air Force Intelligence in Vietnam, he was the Japanese Fire Chief in Austin, and he was a listener, and he'd done some talk radio interviews, he'd been on some syndicated shows, some magazine articles he'd written,
	and he came to some of the events and he said, It's called Information War, and so you want to try to get that URL, and he had a big old laptop.
	He said, look, it's available.
	Do you want InfluentWars.com?
	And so Vic Frigeland got the site.
	He then, even in his spare time, he was still working with the fire department then, he built the basic science stuff, then helped find me a volunteer or whatever at first, and we didn't really have any money, to then start updating the site a little bit every day.
	And that was in 1997.
	So, InfoWars came from an Air Force Intelligence term.
	So, you had the Alex Jones show that was being broadcast, and you also had InfoWars at the same time.
	Yes, I had a radio show.
	At the time I was doing a local radio show, and then I was And so, we could put things on there and show people what we were talking about.
	Did you also start making, in order to support Infowars, did you also start making documentaries?
	I did start making documentaries in 1997.
	I made my first documentary, America Destroyed by Design, about the Great Reset that was coming, and the different UN documents that were in it.
	And then I made more than 25 more films after that.
	Why make the films?
	Most talk show hosts would sell a coffee cup or a newsletter to fund themselves and I wanted to build a larger news organization because I wanted to do more and I wanted to make documentaries so I went out and made documentaries and used the money from that to make more documentaries because that way you could show people What it was you were talking about in a format before that was really the internet.
	Because even though the internet was around, it was mainly text and pictures in 96, 97, 8, 9. Documentaries on VHS and DVD was the way people interfaced with that.
	And at the time, what was your...
	What was the main topic of interest that you wanted to explore through your documentaries, as well as through your radio show and your website?
	The plan to cut off U.S. energy reserves that we're now experiencing, the plan to cut off all coal power generation, then gas, and the forced move on to renewables, but it was In
	addition to your documentaries, are you also an author?
	I am, yes.
	How many books have you written?
	I've written two and contributed to more than 20. We'll talk about your latest book later.
	Let's move forward a little bit.
	In 2001, what if anything happened with you and your program at YouTube?
	We had a series of videos that were very successful on YouTube in the early 2000s.
	Before YouTube came around, in I think 2004, and then it was out of some guy's garage in San Francisco.
	I bought my Google around that time.
	We were actually putting out videos ourselves that we were streaming ourselves, but it became too expensive, so we had to stop Then Google Video came around and we had videos on there with millions of people that watched them.
	We were just putting them out for free.
	It was very popular with the left because it was us tracking and protesting the KKK. It was us exposing police brutality and things like that.
	I wasn't trying to be left-wing.
	I just thought those were really important topics.
	I got really popular Let me ask you about that part, because that's an aspect of your work and who you are that you cultivate, which is different from in the studio.
	From the very beginning, did you believe it was important to go to demonstrations, to talk to the people on the street, to be part of protests?
	Absolutely.
	And how did that play into what you were trying On TV. And that's really what Oprah Winfrey is, too.
	It all goes back to radio, and that started 100 years ago.
	A little bit more now.
	And so...
	That's a separate thing.
	A talk show with opinions and people debating is like The View.
	They're not fact checking.
	They're just giving their opinions.
	When I'm on the radio show, most of the time I'm just a pundit giving my opinion.
	Everybody on talk radio knows that.
	We play devil's advocates.
	We look at both sides.
	I don't do that very often now because people can edit tapes.
	It hurts you bad.
	I would say, well, let's look at this.
	They're saying this and they believe that.
	Now let's look at this.
	Later as I realized my show had a lot more power than I thought, I realized, well, Even if I'm not the one editing these tapes, I've got to be more careful because there's bad guys out there that will do it.
	But the films I'm proud of, we never put any films out about Sandy Hook, never had any products about Sandy Hook.
	The films we would try to really vet and do more journalistic research into and fact-check and interview renowned people.
	I interviewed former U.S. Attorney Generals and members of Congress and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
	That's who we would go for these films, top economists, just really big names for these films.
	And they were very, very popular.
	So that's where I've been journalistic and done a good job.
	I guess with the age of the internet, people grabbing clips out of talk radio or talk TV and mixing it together, I can see how it can cause problems.
	That's why I've admitted that I've made a lot of mistakes, but none of it was done from some master plan deal.
	It was done from a bedroom in my house.
	So one of the things I notice about you is that you have a very distinctive voice.
	Very deep, sort of gravelly voice.
	Did your voice always sound that way?
	No.
	What happened to your voice?
	Why does it sound the way it does?
	Well, I remember the two demonstrations were finally erected.
	And one was about...
	I guess about...
	Twelve, thirteen years ago.
	There was actually film of it.
	I'm sorry, go ahead.
	Do you have some way to tie this to the damages portion of the screen?
	No, no, no.
	I'll address you if I'm trying to hear.
	- This is so the jury can understand who my client is and properly assess his credibility, his manner.
	- This is game. - Let me ask you directly about Infowars as we're coming into the period where Sandy Hook occurs.
	Okay?
	Yes.
	About how many employees did you have circa 2012?
	I'd say about 45, 50. What year?
	2012. Oh, I was broadcasting from offices.
	Studio.
	In terms of size, how does that compare to, for example, the New York Times in terms of how many employees?
	So you can only answer the question if you have actual knowledge.
	About how many employees the New York Times has.
	Otherwise you'll have to say I don't know.
	So as a member of the media, are you generally familiar with the different media organizations that are in the industry?
	Yes.
	And based on that knowledge of the industry, can you tell us size-wise how your organization compares to the New York Times or to CNN? Between one one-hundredth and one-twentieth the size of those different organizations if you count for employees and bureaucracy and the number of offices and things they do.
	So, I want to ask you some questions about the different formats of the different shows that InfoWars broadcasts.
	Can you tell us what the sort of different segments are that would appear on a given day at Infowars circa 2012?
	There was my four-hour radio show.
	Then in 2012, it was just a webcam on me for people that wanted to watch it online.
	And then it was me at a desk with a camera in 2012.
	And then, I mean, that was it, basically.
	At some point, did you all begin to have additional segments besides just you doing your radio show and answering calls?
	Well, yes.
	I mean, that's...
	Now I understand what your first question was.
	What was the different types of media we were doing?
	There was the syndicated radio show that was also had a visual component, digital video online.
	And then there was documentary making, and that's what I had.
	Ten or so people working on with me.
	And then I started to develop reporters and people to go out and actually cover live events and protests and things that were going on.
	And then we also did everything in-house.
	So we had our own shipping department to be able to ship out books and films.
	Not just my books and films, but a lot of other authors.
	Books and films, we interviewed a lot of those authors.
	And so that's what we were doing back then.
	Now, your radio show, was it purely a call-in show, or did you also go sort of on rants about different issues that you were seeing?
	Yes, we would have a lot of calls.
	Sometimes the whole show would be calls.
	Sometimes it would be all guests.
	Sometimes I would just decide that I had so much news that I was going to just cover up to 100 stories on there and just look at them.
	The audience knows whether it's the BBC or whether it's an Infowars story or whatever They can choose.
	They can go look it up for themselves.
	We're just covering what's in this.
	And so we just bam, bam, bam.
	It's the same way today.
	Like Pelosi's in Taiwan.
	What do you think of it?
	You think there's going to be a war?
	The Chinese are threatening war.
	Oh look, Biden fell down again.
	Oh look, they found another trailer full of It's real simple.
	I've got a stack of news.
	We're going to play a video clip of Bill Maher saying we need to depopulate the human population.
	And we go, let's take calls.
	What do you think about Bill Maher saying we should get rid of the majority of people?
	Well, who's going to do that?
	Who's going to do the killing?
	I think this is wrong.
	I think it's dangerous.
	I think it sounds like Hitler.
	I mean, that's what we do.
	And how did, at the time, How did you source the stories that you wanted to cover during that segment of your talk radio?
	95% of what we were covering was mainstream news going, look, they're saying this, do you believe it?
	Or, what do you make of this?
	I mean, it's that kind of thing.
	We would simply do what talk radio does.
	That's what talk radio does.
	Talk about what's going on, what people are saying.
	Ask callers, what do you think of that?
	Do you buy that?
	What do you think is going to happen next?
	Are there really WMDs in Iraq?
	Are they lying about it?
	And then the talk show hosts make their predictions about what they think.
	And then the talk radio listeners basically keep note and see who's the most accurate.
	and it becomes a big game to see who has made the best predictions and things like that.
	And so that kind of lends itself to the very nature of a soapbox is people speculating.
	That's the nature of people going to a park and standing up at Speaker's Corner in London for 600 years and giving their opinion.
	That's what free speech is.
	Now, please tell the members of the jury, has your method where you get your stories, has that changed over the years, from 2012 until today?
	No, it's not really changed.
	I mean, we have clips We'll ask callers what they think about it, or again, we'll say, should Pelosi go to Taiwan?
	The Chinese are threatening war.
	And I said yesterday, I said, I don't really like Pelosi and I don't want war with China, but I think it's good she's going because we should stand up for ourselves and not be pushed around.
	And then we take calls and say, what do you think?
	Well, I think you're wrong.
	We shouldn't go over there.
	I think you're right.
	I mean, it's really that simple.
	Did you then and do you now also host debates?
	We do.
	How do you decide to host a debate and who are going to be the debaters?
	Any issue that is being contested that people think is interesting.
	We've got a Sandy Hook debate where we have a newspaper reporter on who said he thought that it really happened.
	And we have a professor, I forget exactly who on, who thought that there wasn't questions.
	And that's the type of thing that we did.
	I can understand then that people again take clips out of that and move that around and that it can cause problems.
	And that's why now, I mean, I can say I'm more timid, even though they have the state police questions Uvalde in Texas, and even though they stood down for 77 minutes, I think it happened.
	But I've just gone, whoa, I'm going to try to leave this alone as much as possible just because they'll take what I've said out of context.
	But my listeners are now mad at me because I'm not covering it when, I mean, something went on 77 minutes.
	And the kids are begging for help, and the police just stand there, and the state police in Texas say that the head of the state police says, we don't know the truth.
	And it's because of things like that that people just get completely blown away and confused by what's going on.
	But now I realize that those are such touchy subjects that I don't touch it with a 10-foot pole.
	And is that a result of this case?
	You know, it's a result of a lot of stuff.
	In the past, I would have gotten in a car and driven down there, and I think that's what journalists should do.
	But we didn't go down there because I don't want to be associated with the corporate media and the lawyers and the people that swarm around these mass shootings.
	I don't want to be like them.
	So they've accused me of being Mr. Mass Shooting and all this stuff with Sandy Hook when I've covered less than one-tenth of one percent over the years.
	And so I don't want to be like them.
	So we need to send reporters to Uvalde.
	And the American people can figure out what's going on.
	But I'm not going to get involved in it.
	So we've talked about the call-in portion.
	We've talked about hosting debates.
	Do you also interview?
	I think we've talked about Doing the news, based on what you're reading, do you also interview guests?
	I do.
	And do you always select the guest that you're going to interview, or sometimes does one of your producers suggest to you, hey, you should interview this person?
	In radio, the producer isn't the person paying for it.
	And radio just means the booker.
	And then they're calling at the guest on the line or on Skype, and they check into the person.
	We get all these guest offers and things.
	In the past, I would do cursory stuff and sometimes mail it in with guests.
	That's just what talk radio does.
	I mean, I was a producer for other shows 25 years ago, not just my own show, and they were pressuring us, I was helping them produce on a sports show, to get up to five guests an hour.
	So you're just calling people that are already in the news, and they're sportscasters or pundits, just like ESPN now, you show these different writers and talk shows on the show.
	So it's the same for political stuff.
	You're just getting guests that are in the news that are interesting and then getting their opinion about things.
	Now, most of the time, though, I say I want this person, I want that person, and I'm more in control of the guests that I have.
	But in the past, we let more things driven by the inner 4chan and 8chan that in every case I've had problems has been a curse.
	I'm not thanking everybody that's on there, but that's...
	I tell my producers, do not touch it when it's on there.
	Because it's the kiss of death and it causes nothing but problems.
	Why is it...
	Do you think it's important to interview people who are causing a stir on the internet or on social media?
	Why do you feel like that's Well, I mean, most of the time we're not just interviewing people that have caused a stir.
	When I say, like, there's a big controversy or there's a big story, if there's riots in Hong Kong and we can find a reporter who will come on the show, we get them on.
	Furthermore, I don't really follow the news model of covering the news.
	In the past I did, but we still do it a lot.
	But now I mainly just talk about philosophy and the big picture, and then have some guests on, and the show's gotten more Christian, because I'm a Christian, but as things progress, while things happen in the world, I'm moving more towards doing self-help,
	life experience, More that we're going to change the world.
	We can't change ourselves.
	Then we're going to be able to change the world.
	And I've made a lot of mistakes.
	And I've learned a lot in that process.
	And I've also learned how the corporate media is able to completely manipulate a story once you're caught in it.
	And then manipulate other people.
	And if anything, I want to teach people about how that process works.
	Because they say, I'm the mastermind that figured out how to manipulate people and I didn't have any understanding of it.
	And now I've seen it from the inside, the way this stuff goes on.
	And again, I think only getting the individual awake and aware and not under its control is the way to beat it.
	And you can't just cover a bunch of news and get somebody to understand that.
	You can't be told about the matrix.
	you got to see it.
	Let's slow down a little bit and I want to ask you about sort of how your, with these responsibilities, how your typical with these responsibilities, how your typical day sort of shapes up.
	okay?
	How many hours a day are you on the air?
	I'm on the air about four hours a day.
	And since when have you been on the air about four hours a day?
	I've been on the air four hours a day since about 1997, '98.
	And in order to prepare for those four hours that you're going to be on the air every day, well, let me ask you this, how many days a week?
	I'm on the air six days a week.
	So in order to prepare for four hours a day, six days a week, how many hours per day do you spend on prep for your show?
	I spend about two hours at night and about two hours in the morning.
	In addition to prepping for your show for about four hours and being on the air for about four hours, do you have other responsibilities?
	I do.
	And what are your other business responsibilities?
	Well, we don't have a lot of sponsorship because with sponsorship comes the control of the sponsor's political views.
	And so we sell books and films and other things to fund ourselves in About how many hours per day do you spend on general business administration as well?
	Two or three hours.
	So your average day, would you say, is somewhere between 11 hours, 12 hours a day?
	Yes.
	Six days a week?
	Yes.
	Do you depend on other people to help you produce your show and decide what you're going to talk about?
	I do.
	I depend on my crew and I depend on...
	I mean, really what they do is they just give me hundreds of clips that are in mainstream news, alternative news, things that are happening, video clips, and I'll sit there on my computer and just review them, and then I tell them, just print me the top stories off of 10 or 15 news sources and I said go through everything, randomly change it up.
	So everything from Japanese news to news in Mexico to the BBC to the LA Times to just everything and then also alternative media.
	But more and more we just show clips of what's actually happening out in the world that's not disputed.
	There's just Stacks of this.
	You should be on air 24 hours a day.
	All you're doing is like a curator just showing people, hey, we looked at this.
	We think it's interesting.
	We looked at that.
	The idea that there's certain stories that are like these big bonanza stories that we focus on is just not the case.
	There's a glut of news and information.
	So we've talked about your responsibilities and your duties and your work day at InfoWars.
	Do you also appear on other people's shows?
	Yes, I've been on I've been on 20 or 30 BBC shows.
	I've been on Japanese television.
	I've been on...
	I've been on Saudi Arabian TV. I've been on Israeli TV. I've been...
	I mean, I've basically...
	I've been on Brazilian television, Brazilian radio, Mexican TV and radio.
	I mean, I've been on, basically, a lot.
	Let's focus in...
	In the year 2012, How many hours per day was InfoWars broadcasting?
	Not just your show, but everything.
	Well, there's broadcasting and then there's just videos that we're uploading.
	I mean, I'd say...
	How many hours of content per day?
	Six hours.
	Seven hours.
	Okay.
	And in 2013, about how many hours per day?
	2018. 2018. No, 2013. Oh, 2013. Same amount.
	And 2014?
	I'd say a little more, maybe 7. And 15?
	The same.
	16?
	The same.
	17?
	Sorry, just one second.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm not torn wearing access while my voice is like that.
	So, sorry, what were you going to say?
	I was asking you how many hours per day content is being produced and uploaded or streamed on InfoWars in 2017.
	Probably 7-8 hours as well.
	Then it increases to 10 hours a day, or in 17 it did.
	In 17 it increases to 10 hours a day, and then in that state of about 10.
	And it stayed constant now at about 10 hours per day since then?
	There's 10 hours that's always there, there's talk radio, on TV, and then we also put out some other reports and videos.
	Okay, so the answers you just gave us of seven hours per day basically up until 2016 and then starting in 2017, 10 hours per day, that is content that's on the radio that's being streamed.
	And being picked up out of some radio stations.
	So, as we sit here today, since 2017, InfoWars has been producing about 3,120 hours of content per year.
	I haven't done the math.
	Is that what that calculates out to?
	I will represent to you that it is.
	It's, I mean, six days a week.
	We have a little bit less on Sunday until I do stuff on Saturday.
	I mean, that's not about right.
	There's no exact number.
	I never, we never organized at all, so I don't know.
	Excuse me, sorry.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	When did you start bringing on other hosts that have their own programs?
	I think we started the nightly news in like 2000 and...
	Like 2015?
	I don't have the exact dates.
	So we started the nightly news that David Knight and Leigh Ann McAdoo and others were hosts sometime before the 2016 election.
	Who was going to be the first host for the 19 years?
	Well, I hosted it sometimes instead of David Knight, but anyway, I'm sorry, I had a really bad deal here.
	Do you need some more water?
	No, it's a torn larynx.
	It's got a lot worse.
	It's real bad this week, so that's what's going on.
	It's a little bit of voices like that.
	It'll get better in a minute.
	What were we saying?
	I was asking if- Sorry, go ahead.
	If David Knight won a contest in order to be on the show.
	Yes, he did.
	Tell us about how that worked.
	We had a contest of news videos and reports to see the best.
	I don't think he won, I think he entered the contest, but then we hired him and came out with his family from North Carolina.
	He was an engineer and also had done a lot of writing for publications and things.
	And so, he was just a natural for the show.
	Mr. Jones.
	Oh, thank you very much.
	I'm sorry.
	I've had surgery on this.
	It's been like this for 10 years, but it's really bad now.
	So...
	That's the exception to the food and the coffee.
	Very nice to be home.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	Alex, you obviously have a very busy work schedule to yourself.
	to yourself for yourself?
	Do you tell the other hosts what to say or what to cover?
	We're starting to.
	Well, I mean, no, not the past, not really, very rarely, other than I try to pick people that already have done shows, that I've seen their work, that I think are trying to tell the truth, that are smart and who are funny.
	I think we've done a pretty good job of that.
	But they're definitely, we're trying to put in more oversight and be more careful, obviously, about what we do.
	We've definitely learned a lesson from this process of not just things we did wrong, but how people misrepresent what we've done.
	Is it fair to say that yourself and most of your hosts are self-taught through the radio business?
	Owen has a degree in media, but he'll tell you he didn't learn anything with that.
	It was all working at those radio stations from the bottom up.
	He got on here at the top.
	It was the same way.
	Owen had a similar deal that I did.
	I mean, I volunteered when I was at Top Radio.
	I wasn't paid the first six months, and then I got into sales and things.
	But I was producing for sports shows.
	I even got hired by the Howard Stern Show to do an interview with Dennis Hopper and some other folks at a big film festival at the Governor's Mansion.
	So I did that and I worked for Howard Stern on that job.
	So I was doing everything.
	And then that was unpaid to do that.
	Would you say that your organization is more like a radio show or more like a newspaper like the Austin States?
	We're more like the op-ed page in a newspaper, giving our opinion, than, say, the investigative journal section of something.
	So yes, we're like the op-ed, or we're like the funny papers as well.
	I mean, we've got really serious stuff we do where we say, "Here's the documents, here's where they set it, this is what's going on." And then we also have the op-ed, opinion stuff we do, which is what talk radio is.
	And then we also have satire and things like that where it's completely obvious that I'm dressed up like Cobra Commander, that I'm not actually Cobra Commander.
	People know that's a joke.
	Let's talk a little bit about where you get your funding.
	When's the last time you had a corporate sponsor for InfoWars?
	I had some corporate sponsors when I was against George W. Bush in the war.
	We lost a lot because we were anti-war, but we still had some big ones.
	We had car companies, clothing-wise, and we were making a lot of money to expand the operation going back to about 2005, up to when Obama got in.
	And then being anti-war was not allowed anymore, for whatever reason.
	I wasn't anti-Obama, I was anti-war.
	So I continued with being anti-war, and we lost all our sponsors.
	We lost, that was almost, it was about 80% of the money we were making with sponsors.
	We lost about $10 million.
	It was gross money to fund the operation right away when we didn't toe the line with all the wars.
	And so when you lost all that corporate sponsorship because of your position against the war, did you transition to a different business model?
	Yes.
	We'd already been selling some books and films, but we accelerated it, and I said, well, I'm not going to let them shut me down.
	I said this on air.
	I said, you want to shut us down?
	We're $10 million a year.
	I remember saying, I'm going to go to $70 million a year, and I'm going to put it into everything we're going to advertise.
	We're going to explode.
	And so that was my promise, and I fulfilled it.
	And why is it important for you to be self-funded?
	That's what the system fears.
	It's actually come out in some of the presidential library documents out of Little Rock.
	The system fears any independent organic media, whether it's liberal or conservative, What do you
	How do you use the term synthetic as well as steak?
	What do you mean when you say synthetic?
	These are a lot of military terms that I learned just by researching psychological warfare because I knew that they were using it against us.
	So I went and last 20 years got some of the classified ones.
	But a synthetic event is real stuff happening, but they put in place people to help it happen and kind of provocateur to get it started.
	So if you have two pit bulls killing each other, that's a real event, but people that throw them in that They made it happen.
	They brought the dogs there.
	They raised the dogs.
	They trained them how to fight.
	They threw them in the pit.
	So there's two dogs really killing each other, but it's synthetic because people made it happen.
	So when I talk about staged, most of the time I mean they So that's where everybody thought it was really suspicious up front was because of those telltale signs that we've seen before of those type of synthetic connections,
	which don't always mean at the stage, but that's the type of things people look for.
	So you've got different types of false flags.
	You've got synthetic is a way to describe it really happened, but there were forces in there letting it happen.
	Is this kind of like the idea of purposefully focusing people on a particular news story because you want them to vote a certain way or do a certain way?
	A synthetic event.
	When you hear objection, you have to stop.
	Sustained.
	Give us another example of how that would work.
	Well, take that clip earlier today that they heard.
	At the beginning of the clip, And they brought a real clip, but it's synthetic, to try to deceive you.
	And I hope you get to see the real clip.
	And then you'll figure out everything else that's been going on.
	Let's go back to InfoWars and its business model.
	Do you sell vitamins?
	Yes.
	Are your vitamins FDA certified?
	No, they're not.
	Why not?
	1996 law, the FDA has no jurisdiction over any nutraceuticals, not the ones at Whole Foods, not the ones at GNC, and not ours.
	And ours are private labeled, top brands that are sold at Whole Foods GMC and others, they've got the same stuff.
	There's all sorts of crap you can buy at a gas station out there.
	That's not what ours is.
	We buy our PQQ and CoQ10 from the Japanese.
	I mean, it's the best.
	It costs five times what synthetic PQQ and CoQ10 costs.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Well, let me walk it up to you.
	to you and you can tell us just generally what kind of document that is.
	Looks like some type of sales log.
	And can you tell us what year it begins in?
	It looks like September 2015.
	And can you flip to the last page and tell us what year it ends?
	It ends in December 2018.
	If you flip back to the front, can you see the headings?
	Yes.
	Can you see the column that Don't worry, it's not covered, it's the torn lyrics.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	There is a column that is labeled invoice.
	Yes.
	Would that represent gross sales?
	I believe so.
	Let's flip to the last page and you can tell us what the gross sales number is.
	165,230,000.
	Can you tell the members of the jury how much of that represents profit versus just gross revenue?
	It depends on what product it is.
	Some products make 20%, some products make 60%.
	Like on a book, you know, you might be 20%, 30% on food, it's that, and that's the biggest type of things.
	On supplements, if they're on sale, you make 50% of it.
	If it's not on sale, you make more than that.
	Sometimes 100% markup, but usually it's on sale.
	So it really all depends.
	I can tell you bottom line numbers, though, of how much money I've been paid, things like that, or how much money's there.
	Before we discuss that, let's talk about InfoWars, the organization.
	Would you describe it as organized or chaotic?
	It's a mix of both, but it is the opposite of corporate, and there's no corporate culture, and there's no, people are very happy there overall, and it's very, very diverse, and people stay there a long time.
	But I would say the sales department and the shopping cart, that's in another building, It's not even there.
	And it's kind of like two groups that normally talk to each other.
	So the disorganization is between people that do production and the people that Maybe this is an easier way to go after it.
	Let's discuss, for example, email.
	How much email does InfoWars routinely get?
	I mean, I know when we look to comply with the Discovery, which we comply with, it was over 10 million that they had a search that was still in the inbox unopened.
	So it was 10 million unopened and a few hundred thousand opened.
	And that's why there's a lot of stuff we never saw because it was in the 10 million emails.
	So about how much email would you say you get on a given day just sent by random people?
	I can't answer that because about 10 years ago I got rid of my email address because it was getting 20,000 a day.
	And so that was one of the things they didn't believe there was in an Alex Infowars because they said, "Of course you got an email." I'm like, "No, I don't." And that's like it doesn't exist because I can't read that.
	It's just I can't read 20,000 emails.
	How many employees would Infowars have to have, in your view, if you were to actually read every message, every email, every tip that's sent in.
	It would take 10, 15, 20 people we go bankrupt, which we are now.
	Going back to, I want to ask you a question.
	There's a term that's been thrown around during this trial of the truther community or truth people.
	What does that...
	I have a couple of questions on the need to take on the side of the budget.
	So the jury, I don't know if you're going to do that now or what you're going to do.
	That really depends on you, Mr. Bankston, whether you think I need to hear them now or later.
	I'm worried that you do hurt me, so I'd like to go ahead.
	Alright.
	We're going to just sit tight for a second.
	We're going to take a break.
	I don't know if it will eat up the rest of the afternoon or not, so I'm not going to release you in case it doesn't.
	I want to not waste any time.
	And so I'll send someone back if you're going to go Or if you're going to come back.
	Remember all of my instructions.
	On the chance that I don't see you before tomorrow, please arrive at 845 like normal for us to get started.
	All right, thank you.
	All rise.
	I'll just shut the door behind you, please.
	Thanks.
	All right, Mr. Jones, you can go back down to the council table.
	everyone may be seated.
	You just have to wait until the jury has moved to their space before you leave the room.
	All right.
	Hmm?
	All right, Mr. Bankston.
	I don't know what's going on, Your Honor, but I need to bring in a couple of motions for jury instructions, and then I'm going to go ahead and bring a motion for sanctions right now on the record.
	I know you don't want to hear from them, but the jury instructions are going to be now.
	We have...
	As you know, there's been a pattern of Mr. Reynold blatantly violating MIOs and court rules.
	Mr. Reynold just absolutely solicited direct testimony from Mr. Jones that he is bankrupt.
	Mr. Jones has testified straight into the record that he's bankrupt, which is not true, which is a sham that's going on.
	But the most important part, Your Honor, is you have a motion to limit being entered in this case that is in no uncertain terms, that they cannot, due to violating your orders repeatedly to provide networks information, they cannot apply evidence of that work.
	Mr. Jones just intentionally did that, in violation of your order, to attempt to poison this convinced or redamaged verdict.
	And that's in violation of your order.
	And Mr. Randolph drew that right out of him.
	Totally expecting that to happen.
	It was very obvious from the question he asked.
	He wants Mr. Jones to tell this jury he's broken.
	That is ridiculous.
	The second is that he absolutely, Mr. Jones, just fully testified that we complied with discovery.
	I am under the standing M.I.O. not permitted to mention discovery disputes.
	Anything but comply with discovery and did that for four years thumbing his nose in the face of this court in rank contempt.
	There needs to be an instruction to the jury that he did not comply with discovery.
	That materials that were repeatedly ordered by this court will not turn it over.
	Some of that includes his net worth information.
	And I also would like an instruction to the jury to disregard and strike his comments about him being bankrupt, which they are to take as having no evidentiary value and is not true.
	The other thing that Mr. Jones testified to is that he doesn't communicate by email.
	He doesn't have emails to turn on.
	You know from a motion for sanctions that involved defendant's former counsel tampering That they've tampered with a piece of evidence to hide the fact from me that Mr. Jones does have an email and was communicating with him.
	To this date, we still don't know what that email is.
	We don't know, I haven't even produced any of it, but Mr. Jones has just repeatedly been lying on the stand in ways that I cannot counter because they deal with your discovery moments.
	I want the jury to be instructed to disregard all that testimony, that it has been already found by the court that Mr. Jones does have an email, that he did not turn those emails over, and did not admit and deny the existence of that email, that he did not comply with discovery, that he is not bankrupt, and the jury is not to consider it.
	Additionally, on top of those instructions, we are not formally moving to sanctions against both Mr. Jones and Mr. Reynold, who we believe intentionally solicited testimony to sabotage this jury.
	And I would not normally make that accusation so openly against a fellow attorney had that attorney not continually violated rules of this court on every single day, including before putting Mr. Jones on, Clearly attempting to solicit from a witness an attorney-client communication earlier into this day, which as we've seen him violate rules that a first-year law student should know, a first-day law student should know not to ask the plaintiff about her communications of counsel.
	This is absolutely in bad faith, therefore we'd like jury instructions and we're filing a motion for session.
	Would you like to respond, Mr. Reynold?
	If Your Honor thinks it necessary, I will.
	I think that Your Honor can review the transcript of my questions.
	I think my questions elicited that testimony.
	I'm sorry that that came out.
	I don't think that there was anything I could have done in my questioning that would have prevented it from happening.
	I know that Your Honor has contemporaneous transcripts and can look it over.
	So I would urge you to do so because I'm sorry it happened.
	I tried to move on very, very quickly.
	I think Your Honor saw me raise my hand.
	But I can only ask the questions.
	Let me ask Mr. Jones a couple of questions while you're under oath.
	Yes, sir.
	What did your attorney tell you about your testimony today?
	I want to be very careful.
	Were you instructed that there were some things you could not testify about?
	Yes.
	And do you remember what they were?
	Yes.
	And what were they?
	Just top level.
	I'm trying to remember.
	First there was a document you put out saying don't talk about free speech, don't say I'm innocent, and a bunch of other stuff.
	And then that got withdrawn.
	I believe you withdrew it.
	I think it was called motion limiting.
	Okay.
	So you don't remember?
	No, no, no.
	Do you remember day one where I said it's an unfair world and you don't get to interrupt the judge?
	Do you remember that?
	Yeah, okay.
	But the judge gets to interrupt you.
	Remember that?
	Yeah.
	Okay, so you don't really remember what you were not supposed to testify about.
	That's what I'm hearing.
	You said, yes, I remember.
	No, I don't remember.
	I'm trying to remember.
	Okay.
	I don't want you to try and remember.
	I don't want you to try and remember.
	You either knew or you don't.
	I remember him saying, Don't talk about, don't talk about the financial stuff or something like that, like a week ago when I asked him.
	And then, I remember today, watching part of Hesselman's testimony when I was coming here, and him talking about the bankruptcy, so I thought that was totally fine.
	I mean, he gets to, why do I not just do what he gets to do?
	Mr. Jones, stop making, just stop.
	Okay.
	Alright, you can sit down, Mr. Jones.
	Okay.
	Do you have any reply, Mr. Bankston?
	Not really.
	And actually, before I hear from you, you know whose obligation it is, Mr. Reynold, to make sure that any witness you put forward understands the orders in Lemony, understands what he is not allowed to say because of orders that I have made before now, right?
	As an attorney, it's an impossible position.
	That wasn't the question I asked you.
	I know that it is my obligation to communicate Your Honor's orders.
	Beyond that, I think that's all I need to say.
	Your Honor, the only thing I was saying, I actually probably do need to ask for an additional jury instruction.
	During this same testimony, Noah was keeping a tight leash on his client for M.I.L. and why I do believe he was intentionally trying to violate them.
	Because Mr. Reynold had a long series of questions about whether Mr. Jones is a pundit who merely gives his opinion, does not provide facts, was not stating facts, was only giving his opinion.
	That's another one of your emotional limits, that the defendants cannot contest, in this case, that the statements that they were giving were merely protected opinions and not statements of fact.
	That all came out intentionally for Mr. Reynold.
	And you know, too, through the rest of this testimony, that he's been intentionally trying to drive out the viability sections of here in my office.
	As we said yesterday, we think he's intentionally trying for a misdrive.
	And it really is a matter of, oh, whoops, I guess I forgot to remind my client not to suddenly blurt out to the jury that he's broke on the day when he was screaming that he's going to do it.
	When he says, I'm going to come in there and this judge ain't going to hold me down.
	It's going to be her water, Lou.
	And then he comes in here and do that.
	Maybe we could forgive it if he wasn't also asking questions that were directly in violation of my show.
	And, Your Honor, we believe this is just a great question.
	Your Honor, if I may on that point, just on that point.
	Your Honor has ruled already that during this phase of the trial, we are to discuss, and over my objection, all the issues raised by Rule 4111. I've been objecting to that.
	Accept net work.
	Accept net work.
	And within that, for the jury to make an accurate determination, You need to talk about intent.
	You need to talk about degree of malice.
	You need to talk about how extreme the behavior was or wasn't.
	And so the testimony I'm eliciting Which I believe, I've never said, nor has my client said, that your honor's ruling shouldn't stand.
	But in order for the jury to be able to make a decision, they need to know the entire context, and they need to understand the mental state of the participants.
	Because if not, they can't run their ruling on punitive damages.
	Well, the problem is, and you know this, and we've already had this conversation multiple times in this trial, in addition to it before this trial, The time for that was during discovery, when Mr. Jones chose not to fully participate.
	It is not the time to do that now.
	If there is anything that he would like to put forth as a defense, he needed to do it A year ago during the discovery process.
	It's too late now and when you ask questions that imply or outright say that he didn't know how to be a journalist or he wasn't a journalist, you're calling into question my ruling and Which was based on a long-standing principle in the law that if you intentionally,
	repeatedly, and over years, in this case, again and again, refuse to participate in discovery, that is proof that you do not have a meritorious defense.
	That was the basis of my ruling.
	You cannot attack that in this trial.
	For motions to For sanctions.
	You've got to write them down.
	They're under advisement until they're written down and filed.
	We'll take that up post-trial.
	Your Honor, so that I don't run afoul of your ruling.
	I'm not done.
	I'm sorry.
	You don't even know what it is yet.
	For the motions seeking sanctions against Mr. Jones and Mr. Reynold.
	You have to write those down.
	They have to be filed with the court.
	I'll take them up post-trial.
	That may mean during deliberations.
	That may mean later in August.
	I don't know.
	Assume it'll be as soon as I have time, so file a response if you want to.
	Mr. Jones, you may not say to this jury that you complied with discovery.
	That is not true.
	You may not say it again.
	You may not tell this jury that you are bankrupt.
	That is also not true.
	You may have filed for bankruptcy I don't know that, but I've heard that.
	That doesn't make a person or a company bankrupt.
	You're already under oath to tell the truth.
	You've already violated that oath twice today in just those two examples.
	It seems Absurd to instruct you again that you must tell the truth while you testify, yet here I am.
	You must tell the truth while you testify.
	This is not your show.
	You need to slow down and not take what you see as opportunities to further the message you're wanting to further.
	And instead only answer the specific and exact question you have been asked.
	No asides.
	The comments about discovery.
	The comments about the larynx or whatever it was.
	The comments about bankruptcy.
	None of those were responsive to questions.
	They were just you abusing my tolerance And making a size to the jury improperly and in these two cases untruthfully.
	Do you understand what I have said?
	Yes or no?
	Do you understand what I have said?
	Yes.
	I believe what I said is true.
	Yes, you believe everything you say is true, but it isn't.
	Your beliefs do not make something true.
	That is what we're doing here.
	Just because you claim to think something is true does not make it true.
	It does not protect you.
	It is not allowed.
	You are under oath.
	That means things must actually be true when you say them.
	Don't talk.
	You understand what I have said.
	I do understand.
	You understand the instructions I have given you for your testimony in court.
	Yes.
	I'm not going to bring the jury back today.
	My staff is listening.
	They can let the jury go home.
	We'll start back up tomorrow.
	When you come back to testify tomorrow, one more time, no asides.
	Do you understand what I mean when I say no asides?
	Yes.
	Answer only the question asked of you.
	Do you understand what I mean when I say only answer the question asked of you?
	Yes.
	You understand you will still be unwrote when you return tomorrow morning.
	Yes.
	Complete your testimony.
	And you understand that that means you must only testify about things that are true.
	That's my answer.
	If you don't know something, you don't say it.
	If you're asked about your opinion, you can give your opinion.
	But if you're asked to relate something that's truthful and a fact, it must be truthful and a fact.
	Not an assumption, not a guess, not an opinion.
	Do you understand?
	Yes.
	All right.
	You can sit down.
	Anything else?
	Yes, ma'am.
	Just so that I can make sure that I... Don't run afoul of Your Honor's motion in limini or earlier rules.
	Just to be clear, we call them motions.
	I don't issue motions.
	I issue orders.
	These are orders in limini.
	They've not been ordered since before this trial started.
	Is Your Honor ordering me not to explore the nature of the wrong?
	That is very broad.
	The character of the conduct involved.
	You may not elicit testimony designed to leave the jury with the impression that Mr. Jones and Free Speech Systems did not defame Mr. Heslund or that Mr. Jones and Free Speech Systems did not engage In the intentional infliction of emotional distress against Ms. Lewis and Mr. Hesler.
	May I elicit evidence as to the low degree of culpability that should be ascribed to free speech systems and to Alex Jones by virtue of his education, his situation, the situation of Infowars, and what was going on.
	So Mr. Jones was too ignorant to know that he was lying?
	Is that your defense?
	Your Honor, my defense is for the jury, not for the court.
	I'm asking whether I can elicit testimony as to his mental state, to the organization of the company, to the standard practices in his industry, to what was going on in his personal life.
	All To illustrate the low degree of culpability that should be attributed to this conduct.
	You can ask Mr. Jones questions about similar to some of the questions or all the questions that were allowed when Ms. Karbova was on the stand that kind of touched on these same areas that were allowed.
	I think those are fair game.
	You can ask him.
	I mean, I think the answer is yes, as long as you're very careful.
	Anything else?
	From you, Mr. Hinell.
	No.
	Anything else from you, Mr. Hinell?
	The only thing is I want to confirm to you that tomorrow morning we'll be taking up whether there will be instructions and should I propose instructions?
	Yes, please propose the exact instruction you would like me to give.
	I think it would be appropriate to give those instructions, if any, before Mr. Jones retakes the stand.
	You're on?
	One second, please.
	I think we need something.
	We need some instruction.
	So you can do it the way you did the proposed charge instructions.
	You can both send my office an email if you would like to.
	Yes, Mr. Reynold?
	Mr. Jones would like to say something that's directly relevant to what we've been discussing.
	I am not...
	Very briefly, Your Honor.
	I think it's important for my candor towards the court that you hear what he has to say.
	I am not...
	Typically in the process of hearing from parties, except when they are on the stand.
	And I don't see a reason to change that practice any more than I already have.
	This is simply in line with your honor's question as to what he was instructed in terms of what he should pass the call.
	It doesn't matter at this stage.
	I expect that you will go over the instructions as you are Required to do under the rules, and I'm going to leave it there.
	Anything else?
	Well, let's do a time check.
	We're certainly going longer than I think we have all sort of hoped.
	Mr. Reynold, you've used 10 hours and 33 minutes.
	And today it's very inflated because all the breaks I just attributed to extra, so it looks like we've worked, well we have worked, but it's more than five and a half hours for today.
	So the sort of extra category is 7 hours and 6 minutes.
	And Mr. Bankston, for your side, it's 17 hours and 3 minutes.
	So I haven't done the...
	Let me hang on one second.
	Let me figure one thing out.
	Yeah, so today it's all out of whack because it's well over 6 hours.
	And I don't calculate.
	I calculated 5 and a half ago.
	Anyway, I think we're okay.
	I'm going to say that we need to conclude.
	I think we will run into a problem and run out of time, potentially, if we go past the lunch hour with evidence.
	Do you have a witness once Mr. Jones is finished?
	Mr. Jones is already finished.
	Okay.
	So hopefully we can get that.
	Anything else on the record?
	No, no.
	Let's go off the record.
	Anything else at all?
	We've gone over and witnessed only be Mr. Jones.
	We've gone over hours.
	Is there anything else?
	Will we be arguing tomorrow afternoon?
	Yes, yes.
	We will...
	Do our formal charge conference as soon as Mr. Jones's questions from the jury are concluded.
	And then, depending on breaks and all of that, we're going to start.
	We're going to start.
	Alright, anything else?
	Alright.
	Oh, there is something else.
	yeah I'm just thinking would you assuming everything goes just swimmingly in this past as you can tomorrow which is hard to do would you expect us to go into the punitive portion should the jury very quickly so the problem is you know I have to read the entire jury charge out loud And then I also have to read, I think it's a page.
	Let me see real quick.
	It's hard for me to believe that would happen.
	I just wanted to...
	Yeah, I don't think it will either.
	I read a page of other instructions and then I read the entire charge out loud, which it's not that long.
	I finalized it, but it's only 11 pages.
	And as you attorneys know, one of those pages is the signature, so it's not that bad.
	But I still think that's 15 minutes.
	Then when they go back, they don't have any evidence because we have to review it on the record.
	And then it goes back.
	So I find it unlikely.
	How would Your Honor like what evidence we do have to be on a thumb drive?
	How do we do that?
	So, to date, the only exhibits you've admitted are paper.
	Didn't know there's a video.
	It's been admitted?
	It has.
	I think it's Exhibit 6 and 7. It was admitted without objection.
	Has it been played to the jury?
	It has.
	It's the Father's Day message.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	Right.
	Okay.
	Okay, so so far what I have from you is...
	67.
	That's it.
	Great.
	Where is it?
	It's supposed to be up here with my corporator.
	It's in your honor's computer.
	Corporate computer.
	Oh, in that one?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Yeah, so we're going to need, and I'll be honest, I actually don't know what the system back there is.
	Oh, you know what?
	It's going to be the exact same system as this because they're deliberating in a neighboring courtroom.
	So I will need a thumb drive or something similar that contains only, only admitted exhibits admitted to the jury and nothing else.
	Are you guys listening?
	Okay.
	Because the same thing goes for you.
	So, if you have something that's a court exhibit, that's fine.
	You can give that to me separately.
	We have a few, but the videos are only the ones that are admitted in their admitted form, which for the plaintiff includes the full video and the clips.
	Does not include the deposition videos.
	Make sure those are not on there.
	I understand that.
	Okay.
	And this, Your Honor, is PX32 that I have moved into evidence today.
	Great.
	I'll leave it up here for Ms. DuBois.
	Any other questions?
	There you go.
	All right.
	We'll see you tomorrow.
	Thank you.
	All rise. All rise.
	All rise.
	All rise.
	You can't feel in fake videos anymore?
	No, shut them out.
	That's what you're trying to shut them out.
	You don't ever succeed.
	I'm autistic too, buddy.
	Thank you.
	Did you see her actually shots?
	Yeah.
	Ed, do you need help with anything?
	I'm going to...
	Thank you.
	Okay, so the building's closed.
	Oh, sorry.
	That's right.

▲