All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 21, 2022 - Depositions & Trials
05:00:49
Watch Live: Alex Jones Defamation Trial: Sandy Hook 'Hoax' Lawsuit - Connecticut Trial Day Six
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Also do some work in documenting evidence or documenting that front porch area that was just depicted.
Yes.
I'm going to hand you another stack of pictures.
States exhibit B61. I'm actually going to take this.
I'm going to put up, I've taken down States exhibit B332. I'm going to put up States exhibit B334 for the jury.
Can you look at State Exhibit B334. Can you tell the jury what that is?
This is a diagram, rough diagram, not the scale of the residents produced by agent Durst subsequent to our Hmm.
You know, it's very early for a two-part question, Jesse, but let me give it my best shot.
Yes and yes.
The atmosphere here is, you know, it's somewhat reserved.
When Norm Pattis, Alex Jones' attorney, came to the courthouse earlier today, I asked him a couple of quick questions, but it was very polite.
I'm I was looking around, asking myself, why is nobody else yelling questions at this guy?
But they weren't, and I did.
And at that point, his attorney, Alex Jones' attorney, said, I don't know if he's going to be here today.
I know we've been told to produce him when the court requests, but I don't know.
He said, maybe it'll be 2 o'clock today.
Honestly, I don't know.
Now, when an attorney tells me, honestly, I don't know, we're in the midst of a trial, you know, I take it with a proverbial grain of salt.
But about 10 minutes ago, an ominous black SUV pulls up.
A couple of burly guys get out, and one of them approaches the gathering, as you see behind me, and says, announces that Alex Jones will be here at 1.30, and he will be making a statement at that time.
So, that's the plan, Jesse.
He's here at 1.30.
30, I think we can assume it's because he's going to take the stand this afternoon.
You know, we've heard him say just about everything. we've heard him say just about everything.
You know that whole gag order theory?
I'm not so sure Alex Jones is big on that.
So he says things that get him in trouble.
He makes predictions about the outcome.
He blames the court.
He called the judge a tyrant yesterday.
So yeah, it'll be entertaining.
It may not be in his best interest.
But I'm not so sure he really gives that much of a thought.
You've heard of client control issues, Jesse.
This guy's got to be a client control nightmare.
Yeah, that's a good question.
We had the same question in Austin.
Let's face it, you can't keep this guy quiet.
He's looking for an audience...
His motives have, I think, nothing to do with winning or losing this trial.
And as we know, liability's already been determined.
This is all about the dollars.
I don't think he cares either way.
I think he believes in all publicity is good publicity.
So, I think, obviously...
For our audience, this is a little confusing because it's a civil case and he's being called in the plaintiff's case and he's the defendant.
So he could then appear as a defendant representing his own interest when the defense case takes place.
It'll really depend on how that first part of this process plays out, how his counsel, Norm Pattis, feels he did as a witness in the plaintiff's case and then, of course, during the cross-examination where he can effectively rehabilitate his own witness.
If he feels there are things they didn't quite get covered, maybe they bring him back in the defense case.
You bet.
Thanks, Jess.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay.
Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay.
Okay.
I don't have this unless I tell you otherwise.
If I'm going offline I'll send you a minute.
Thank you.
I'm going to go to the next one.
I'm going to go to the next one.
I'm going to go to the next one.
I'm going to go to the next one.
Thank you.
Alright, like this week .
All is clean, you're just rough.
I am going to find out.
I am going to find out.
I am going to find out.
Please be seated.
Good morning, guys.
All right, so this is the Lackarty v.
Jones matters, week two, day six of trial.
If council could please identify themselves for the record.
Good morning, Your Honor.
Chris Maddy on behalf of 2620 this morning by attorneys Josh Koscoff and that's from the call.
Norm Tattis on behalf of Jones and Free Speed Systems.
Jenny.
All right.
I don't know if you have any business to deal with before the jury comes in.
I do, so let me go first.
In accordance with judicial branch policy, only those entities that have been specifically authorized may photograph or record.
If anyone violates that policy, their devices will be confiscated and they will be I'm sure the marshal already said it, but please make sure all your cell phones and Apple watches and new devices are either off or on silent.
One matter that I have is although he did report today one of your alternate jurors Would prefer not to continue to serve in light of certain financial restraints.
So he did appear today and I have not released him.
He is an alternate.
Is this the individual who had a time-limited reimbursement policy Well the information I got is that it would be a hardship and then what he determined was that the state does not reimburse the $50 per
day until the end of the proceeding so it would be a hardship for him but he did appear today so what I wanted to raise it with you.
Attorney Pattis do you have a position?
I mean, it would have been enough to disqualify him or excuse him during jury selection.
So if the same standard applies, I think I agree with that.
All right.
So we will, Mr. Ferraro will release him with our thanks.
And he did do the right thing in a few today.
So I'm grateful for that.
And I will just briefly mention to the remaining nine jurors that I'll make a comment so they're not left wondering.
Okay.
You had a housekeeping matter, Attorney Matty?
Yeah, we had two issues.
Attorney Costoff will handle the first and will handle the second.
Okay.
Hi.
Good morning, Your Honor.
Good morning.
I'm asking the court just for a few minutes here to entertain and just to wait with the oral motion for reconsideration concerning the ruling regarding the I'm really not going to entertain a motion to reconsider at this point,
but I think I've made it pretty clear that it's going to be a very narrow line of inquiry.
Regarding their activities and such and there's not gonna be any extrinsic evidence and I would entertain any objections from the plaintiffs if the questioning goes beyond that very narrow area.
So, but I'm not going to reconsider the ruling.
So I should not argue with that?
Well, I'm not going to – I would say – I just want to make sure the record is protected on this so I don't – Oh, I think the record – we have a good record.
Okay.
And then in light of that, Judge, can we...
Well, let me just ask Attorney Pat, is there anything you need to bring up?
You understand the court's ruling on the limited inquiry?
I do.
I think maybe then I'm not the person in this trio that doesn't fully understand the scope of it and the questions that are I understood it, and Attorney Pat has correct me if I'm wrong, that the inquiry was going to be along the lines of the plaintiff's activities and views that they've expressed.
Is that fair to say?
Yes.
Well, then I would like the opportunity to judge for two minutes to put on the record my opposition to that.
I think the record's clear, so I'm, and I understand your objection, but that is what it is.
All right.
Do we have one other thing for me?
Yes, Your Honor.
I want to raise this now because it relates to Alex Jones' testimony.
We expect to call him either later today or tomorrow.
It came to my attention last night that he put out a broadcast yesterday in which he told his audience that you were going to instruct him at the outset of his testimony that he was essentially required to testify falsely based on what he believes the truth is.
And he used that as further evidence to attack these proceedings
Of course, the reality is that defense counsel last week requested that you canvass him, even though defense counsel acknowledged that it's his responsibility to make sure that Mr. Jones I
might have even made the offer to Attorney Pattis, who happily accepted my offer.
I think there's nothing wrong with doing it.
I think it could avoid any unpleasantness or other situations.
Oh, of course.
Oh my goodness.
Listen, I'm doing this So that we avoid any unpleasantness in front of the jury.
That's why I'm doing it, but I will canvass him, and if there are issues, the jury is going to be sitting there, and I'm not going to have the jury jump up and down a million times.
Attorney Pattis?
My recollection is as follows, and I stand to be corrected.
We had a motion to eliminate argument prior to the proceedings.
The court made rulings about what the scope of the testimony could be offered.
And I responded by suggesting that Mr. Jones intended to testify in a certain vein.
And my recollection is that the court took exception, perhaps to my tone, and the suggestion that Mr. Jones might be offering testimony inconsistent with the reporters, and you made it clear that there could be contempt, and that you wouldn't hesitate to impose a contempt finding, and you made it clear that there could be contempt, and that you wouldn't hesitate to You would canvas him.
I didn't object to that.
We followed up on that several days later.
I said I thought it was a good idea.
I saw as he arrived in court part of a press conference in which he made statements to that effect.
And I think that I've alerted counsel that there may be testimonial privilege issues arising from Mr. Jones' posture and the law of the case and alerted him yesterday to cases that he should read in anticipation of that.
So I think I've done my job.
I don't know what the court wants to do.
That's a trial management issue.
I think based on the comments I saw Mr. Jones make, he is aware of the court's rulings and will choose to obey them or not.
And beyond that, I'm not sure what more I am told.
My recollection, and the record will control, of course, is that before I made the offer on more than one occasion, Attorney Pat, is you had expressed concerns to your credit that while you understood, not necessarily agreed with the court's orders and rulings, but that while you would obey them as an officer of the court, You were concerned that Mr. Jones would not.
Is that fair to say?
It is.
And I thought that it was my responsibility to alert you to that as an officer of this court.
Right.
Okay.
So I don't think we'll have a problem.
I think, you know, I'll plan on doing what I said I would do, of course, outside the presence of the jury and canvass Mr. Jones.
And I don't anticipate that we will Have a problem and if we do.
In a minute I just wanted to finish what I was saying and if we do have an issue Mr. Jones will be dealt with just like any other witness or party who's appeared before the court so he's not going to get special treatment he's not going to get more harsh treatment unfortunately over my career I have had the opportunity to Um, have contempt hearings.
It's not pleasant, but that's what you do.
And, um...
I think we understand.
Maybe we...
Sure.
Just give me a second.
So.
Yes.
I will say he's been very attentive throughout the trial.
I do.
And he showed up at an afternoon.
I didn't know it.
I got to sleep at night, so I'm glad you agreed.
So, testimony, which is the fifth?
So, I alerted Attorney Maddie to this yesterday.
And I've heard Mr. Jones, I've heard him say that on the record, on a press conference.
His record, right.
By the way, those press conference are not going to be a lot of people.
He's not doing that.
Where can you go?
He's coming down, right?
He did one on the courthouse steps yesterday.
I'm going to put this on.
The issue that will arise for the court, and I was going to wait until he testified because it came up, and I can talk to you.
Well, you can tell me the case that you took.
I have educated myself on the scope of Connecticut General Statute 5133. That's the one where the lawyer can assert it in the civil case?
No, no, Judge.
This is a criminal and summary contempt.
And so the court has the discretion, based on the record before it, to impose a sanction of $100 or up to six months in prison.
No, no, no. No, no, no, no.
no. No, no, no.
no. No, no, no.
no. No,
no.
Thank you.
Thank you.
No, I usually do.
I think we'll be fine.
I'm going to put it.
I'm going to put it.
I'm going to put it six months ago.
I'm just touching the cross here, isn't it?
I'm going to put it on the side of the paper.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And I was just going to say, as a heads up, he did tell me that story in the past.
He had said he wasn't sure where he would go, but he expected him to be short.
We have three attempts to compare today.
If the cross is really that short, we could be ending where we did it, and I just agree with him.
It was a decision.
It is a decision based on that one.
It's not today.
So I just.
It's a case.
It is.
It's a case. It's a case. It's a case. It's a case. It's a case. It's a case. It's a case.
If you look around the table.
Okay.
Your Honor.
Your Honor.
I know that.
I'm fine.
All right.
Are we ready for the jury?
Yes, Your Honor.
Mr. Carter, you will let our one juror go with our face?
Yes, you will.
Okay.
Thank you.
Happy Wednesday to everyone.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Welcome back.
Please be seated.
So you might remember from my beginning remarks how important it is for this trial that we have The for alternate serve because there are often times unforeseen circumstances that make it impossible for a juror or an alternate juror to continue to serve and in fact that has happened today so I have excuse your
one of your alternate jurors and it's just extremely important that are in any emergencies That the rest of you do appear as you've been appearing on time so that we can reach a verdict because we do need our jury.
So I am now going to be doing the mental count to 9 instead of 10. And so I will just state for the record that our entire panel now has returned.
Counsel, you agree?
Yes, sir.
We dealt with some housekeeping issues this morning.
The lawyers were here very early, and I know you were down here waiting, so we thank you for your patience, but it's better to try to deal with them ahead of time rather than bring you out, have you go back in, back and forth.
So this trial has actually had Way less disruptions with the jury going in and out than a typical trial, so hopefully that works for you.
All right, so I think we are ready to continue, and Mr. Ferraro, you will do what needs to be done with that remaining notebook, correct?
If that juror had a notebook.
All right.
Whenever you're ready, please.
Thank you, Your Honor.
Good morning, Your Honor.
We call...
Good morning.
We call David Wheeler.
Ron, there's water in the picture.
I know I ask you every day, but just in case you didn't.
Good morning, sir.
Good morning.
Just watch your step there.
I see you brought your own water, but if you run out, you can refill with the picture there.
Thank you.
Please remain standing and raise your right hand.
You're silent and swear or sincerely referring that the evidence you should get concerning this case should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but truth.
To help you, God, we'll abide by a penalty of murder.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Be seated.
Would you please state your name, slowly spell your last name for the record, and then the state and county in which you live.
My name is David Wheeler, last name spelled W-H-E-E-L-E-R, and I live in Fairfield County, Connecticut.
You may inquire Attorney Koskopf whenever you're ready.
Thank you, Your Honor.
Good morning, David.
Good morning.
You and I know each other, obviously, for some time.
I want to begin by asking you, are you the father of Benjamin Wheeler?
Yes.
And did Benjamin Wheeler die?
Sandy Hook shooting?
Yes.
And I want to ask you about your background and where you're from and things like that.
Can you tell the jury a little bit about your background up and through college?
Sure.
I was born in Northern California.
My dad was in the Air Force and he We lived in California and moved to Rhode Island and my dad got his doctorate in oceanography.
And then we sort of bounced back and forth between the coasts as he was following jobs back to Rhode Island where he got his degree.
And then we moved to California where he worked in a marine biology station there.
And then back to New Hampshire where he got a job on the faculty at the University of New Hampshire.
And so that's I was nine when we got there and I stayed there through sixth grade through graduating high school.
And then I had had enough of the New Hampshire winters.
So I went to college in San Diego.
So That was an upgrade.
Yeah, yeah.
And when did you go to college, and can you tell the jury what you studied?
Sure.
I went to San Diego State.
I got a degree in theater.
I was a theater major.
And then I stayed in San Diego for a couple of years after graduating, and then moved back to New York to try to work as an actor.
And can you give us, when you moved back to New York from San Diego to try your luck as an actor, I guess, when was that, David?
That was 1987. Okay.
And did there come a time, first of all, how did the acting career go, or at least early on?
Well, you know, not good.
I think out of the years I spent in New York trying to do that, I think I made money as an actor maybe three out of the entire number of years I was there.
And were you in anything that we would have seen?
Probably not.
I mean, I did extra work in some films, but, you know, it's the blink-and-you-miss-it kind of thing.
Okay.
So, and by the way, do you know whether Alex Jones ever saw any of your pictures or any films in the theater?
No, no.
I have no idea.
Okay.
Do you know whether he knew you had tried your luck as an actor?
I don't know.
Okay.
And so you're in New York.
Just give us, how many years total were you in New York?
20. 20?
Okay.
And did there come a time when you met a particularly A person that you were particularly interested in, of the opposite sex?
Yes, so one of the things that I did in the city as an actor that sort of got the most traction was that a buddy of mine and I formed a comedy duo, like a sketch comedy duo.
We were both musicians as well.
He played piano and I played guitar.
And so we would do sketch comedy and we would write these sketches that had a lot of music in them and then, you know, just that sort of thing.
And that started to get a little bit of notice from people and we had a show that we put together.
It was kind of a variety show.
And we did it at all the comedy clubs in the city.
We started at Caroline's on 48th and Broadway, and then we were at Catch a Rising Star for a while, and then at Gotham Comedy for a while, and we moved the show around a little bit.
And the way the show worked was that we would have a stand-up comedian do a short five or ten minutes at the beginning, and then we would do a bunch of sketches, and then we would have a stand-up comedian do another five or ten minutes at the end.
And then in the middle we have some kind of a small band that would do a straight, legit musical act that would do either a single person doing a singer-songwriter thing or a small combo or something.
And we're doing the show at a venue up on Amsterdam And we were trying to get a musical act for the show, and we were asking this friend who had a band, and she said, we can't do it, but you should ask my friend.
She's got this trio.
And they were a close harmony trio, like Andrew Sisters stuff, like, you know, and girl group stuff, Motown, that kind of thing.
And so we hired them to do the show.
And I say we hired them, but I don't think they got paid.
And one of the people in that band was the woman who ended up being my wife, Francine.
And that's how we met.
And Francine's in the score room?
Yes.
Can you just point her out?
Right.
Second in the front row there.
The jury will get to know Francine later on.
Right.
So, was it the rest history?
Well, we were both very busy trying to live those kinds of lives where juggling is your everyday experience.
And I think I called her And I think she thought I was calling her for a date.
But in fact, I was calling her to work the door at our next show because our door person had bailed.
How'd that go over?
Not well.
She wasn't happy about that.
But then we continued to sort of get to know each other.
And then we decided that we wanted to go out on a date.
But I think it took almost a month Before we could find the time to have a date, because we were both so busy with work and pursuits and following everything we were doing.
And I'll let Francine tell her version of the story in part two when she gets up there.
But did there come a time when you and Francine Decided to get married?
Oh, yeah.
So, you know, very shortly after dating seriously, we knew that this was not like other relationships we had.
And at the same time, we knew that we were done with The business and wanted to pursue other careers.
I had always been an illustrator as well and done some design work and illustrations, so I got out of the business and after a brief stint working at an executive placement place, I got hired in 2000. So Francine and I met in 98. And then in 2000, I got hired to do book jacket design at a publishing company in the city, trade publishing, trade books.
So I was doing jackets for books.
And then around the same time, she was transitioning into a career as a preschool music instructor and a music specialist.
And so the 20, you gave up acting, your career in acting, after about 20 years?
Yeah, well, I mean, yeah, roughly.
I mean, a little less than that.
I think I went on my last real audition in 2004, maybe, 2003. It kind of dribbled off, you know.
I kept going out. - And did there come a time when you and Francine decided to have children?
Yes.
All right.
And can you tell us, when did you have your...
Well, we...
Were you in New York when you had your...
Yes.
One of the things we recognized when we realized that this relationship wasn't like others was that we both wanted kids.
And, you know, we were not dewy-eyed youngsters at that point.
So we knew we had to...
You were dewy-eyed older than youngsters?
Yeah, right.
And so, you know, the way I like to describe it is it's the first time in my whole life that I met somebody and, like, looked down the avenue and all I saw were green lights.
You know what I mean?
It's like just everything lined up in terms of what we wanted from life and from each other and And so, our first son, Nate, was born in 2003. We got married in 2001. And then our son, Nate, was born in 2003. We were living in Queens at the time.
In Sunnyside, and then Ben was born three years later in 2006. And after Benny was born, we realized that we weren't, you know, having kids in the city is hard.
It's a tough thing to do.
And we wanted to have a kind of an easier time of it.
So then we started looking for other places to live after Ben was born, before he was a year old.
So Nate is how many years, or was how many years older than Ben?
Three.
And when did you move to Newtown?
So in 2007, we left Queens and we did that thing where you sort of make a circle and try to find a place that you can afford to live.
And we wound up in Newtown.
We had friends who had moved to Sandy Hook several years before.
And we'd been visiting them up there, and they were saying the schools are great.
The town is great.
There's something about this town, about Newtown and the San Diego area that's great.
And I had grown up in New Hampshire, and so moving to Connecticut was kind of a little bit like coming home for me in a way, after 20 years in the city.
And it really, really appealed to me, the idea of living in a place where there's trees and woods and, you know, around that sort of thing.
So we moved in 2007. We rented what I like to say is the only house in Newtown that was smaller than our apartment in Queens.
And we were there for a couple of months and then we found a place and we bought a place in Sandy Hook.
Nate and Benjamin go to the elementary or preschool?
Right.
So Nate and Ben both went to Trinity Day School, which was a preschool pre-K program.
And then they both went through the system.
Nate in 2012 was in fourth grade and so Ben went to Trinity for the pre-k and then he started first grade in September of 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary.
And who is his teacher?
So his teacher was A woman named Mrs. D'Amato, but on December 14th of 2012, she was not in the school.
She had a doctor's appointment.
She had recently discovered that she was pregnant.
She was not in the school that day and there was a substitute in her place.
Let's not talk about December 14th for a minute.
Sure, yeah, okay.
And I want you to tell the jury a little bit about Ben.
Sure.
What was Ben like?
Ben was, in many ways, a typical six-year-old boy.
If you have experience with six-year-old boys, a lot of energy, a lot of rambunctious behavior.
He was the second kid, so he was trying a little harder to get our attention in those busy years.
He, you know, every parent thinks their kid is the greatest, and he had a wonderful sense of humor.
Really funny kid.
And he moved very, very quickly through the world.
Nothing really ever moved fast enough for him.
He was always going.
In fact, his nickname Was Crash.
We called him Crash and that was just the beginning of his nickname as the years went by.
We sort of added on to the nickname with stuff that happened to him or things he did to other people.
So his full nickname was Crash Hopalong, Hurt Himself, Jawbreaker, Shiner, Split-Lip, Gash Eye, Faceplant, Nosebuster, Wheeler.
That's what we called him.
Did he add those names as time went on?
Yes, as time went on each one of those sort of added on.
Well-earned nickname?
Yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
He...
He was a very...
As is typical of six-year-old boys, a passionate and sometimes a loud kid.
One night at the dinner table, if I could tell this story, one night at the dinner table, he was just behaving terribly.
I mean, you know, holding the fork by the wrong side and just being obnoxious and loud, and I had had enough.
And I picked him up from the table at the end of a long day, and I was holding him.
I picked him up like this, and I was holding him like this, and I was going to take him up the stairs and sit him down on his bed and have a conversation about how we behave at the dinner table, you know, another conversation about that.
And so I'm taking him up the stairs, and I've got him like this, and halfway up the stairs, he bites me right here.
He bit me.
And I sat him down on his bed, and I said, sweetheart, I said, you can't bite people.
You know, you can tell me that you're angry, you can tell me how frustrated you are, but you just can't bite people.
And he looked at me and he said, but Dad, I had to bite something.
And I mean, it's weird, but now I'm, you know, I'm kind of glad he did.
I have this scar.
And Ben had...
Ben, let's show a picture.
Can we show a picture of Ben?
Sure.
No, sir.
Let me show the picture.
No more answer.
This is exhibit.
It's 316, Your Honor, and it is a full exhibit.
Thank you.
Agreed.
This doesn't look like a binder there.
Ben never lost a tooth, and he really hated the fact that he was already six and hadn't lost any teeth.
His friends were all losing teeth, and he hadn't lost a tooth yet.
And never did?
No.
And we're showing this picture, and we'll take down a second, but can you just tell the jury about when this picture was taken?
Spring of 2015. Well, yeah, spring.
Spring of 2012. So he was five there.
His birthday was in...
No, he was...
I'm sorry.
His birthday was in September, so he was six at that point.
And...
Ben and his older brother, Nate, what was their relationship like?
They were best friends.
And, you know, they squabbled the way young brothers do.
But they were very, very, very close.
And, yeah, real close.
Now, I just want to ask you about just the last time you saw Ben, when?
Well, the last time I saw him alive was the morning of December 17th.
I'm sorry, December 14th, 2012. But the last time I saw him was the following Monday.
Were you in court, David, when Bill Aldenberg testified about his observations as a witness at Sandy Hook?
Yes.
On December 14, 2012?
Yes.
And when Carly Soto Parisi gave her account?
Yes.
And is it hard, I mean, I imagine it's hard to put in words perfectly what happened, but is it, if it's okay with you, well, let me ask you, did they do a, did their testimony strike you as being reasonably reflective of the scene at San Diego Canave?
Objection, Judge.
I'm adding a testimony to another.
Well, I'm just using it as a predicate, because if that's the case, I don't want to have to go through with it.
You're rejected.
Sustained.
Do you have anything to, well, we'll draw.
I mean no disrespect, but I'm going to skip your experience on that day.
Okay.
But I do want to ask you some questions about what happened after the shooting.
And in the weeks, in the week after the shooting, were you out in the public much or what was No, no.
We immediately hunkered down and stayed home.
Friends and family started showing up right away and we were very lucky that a close friend of ours showed up very soon after perhaps even the next day and just took charge of everything.
She just literally showed up with a clipboard and a laptop and took over and it was a real blessing.
I don't know what we would have done without her.
And Did there come a time when you learned that your family, your experience, Ben's existence, your credibility, Francine's credibility, was being smeared in some manner?
Yeah.
We had put ourselves in a kind of a bubble and we weren't watching the news.
We were staying away from the TV. And this friend of ours, who was helping us, took us aside, I believe it was about a week or so afterwards, and sat us down and said, listen, there's this guy saying these things, and other people are saying them too, and this is what's happening, and you need to know before you find out in some other way.
And she told us what was going on and what people were saying.
She told us about Alex Jones and she told us what he was saying.
And what was your understanding, at least at that time, we saw, you were in court, we saw videos that this was repeated over the course of years.
Yeah, oh yeah.
But at that time, what was being said, what were you made aware of that was being said about the Sandy Hook experience?
You know, the first thing I remember hearing was that he was saying it was a hoax.
And that that was being repeated by others.
And you learned this through your protective friend?
Yes, that's right.
And did your friend make you aware of any specific instances in terms of your family?
Well, not at that moment.
Not at that moment.
But, you know, that came shortly thereafter.
Okay, so you learned this about a week after you're in this bubble, and this is the first time you learned this.
And can you just give the jury a sense as to what that made you feel like, or what you're thinking when you heard that?
Well, after the shock of Ben's murder, We were...
I mean, the best way to describe it is we were like, I felt like I was underwater.
And I didn't know which way was up.
And so you're grasping with that.
You're trying to get your head around that.
And to have someone publicly Telling the world that it didn't happen and that you're a fraud and a phony is incredibly disorienting.
It's like you're already fighting and I could not understand why in the world anyone would think this.
I couldn't figure it out.
Did there come a time when you came out of the bubble enough to look into this?
Right.
So, yeah, I mean, as our ability to interact with the world increased, as the days went by and the weeks went by and the months went by, I started looking into it a little bit when people would say, hey, this and that and the other thing.
And so I started seeing You know, what was out there on YouTube and what people were posting on social media.
And around that same time or maybe a little bit before that, I had been using Facebook Fairly early on because, you know, I've lived all over the country and so I've got friends, you know, all over the place and Facebook really was the best way for me to let people know what was going on.
And I would write posts about letting them know sort of how we were doing.
And I felt that was kind of a responsibility to let the people we cared about know that, know sort of where we were as we went through this.
And it was not long after that unsolicited messages started coming through, primarily through Facebook.
And people were, you know, accusing me of lying, telling me Ben never lived, telling me that I was going to burn in hell, and that I would pay for what I had done.
And That, you know, that continued for quite a while.
And in terms of, they said you got messages to the effect that accusations that Ben didn't live.
Yes.
Yeah, that it was a hoax, that I was an actor, that I was a liar, that I was a fake.
They weren't referring to your early days?
Not that I'm aware of, no.
Can you give us just any inkling or sense as to what it's like to have gone through that, having lost Ben in the way he did, and then to be told by the public that he didn't live?
An event like this makes you question everything.
You know, if a kid who was that big a life force in your house could just be gone like that, what else is possible?
It makes you question everything.
So you're already completely off balance, right?
And then something like this comes along and people start saying stuff like this and it derails you.
It completely derails you.
And I'll say it again, it's the best way to describe it.
It's completely disorienting.
Like you don't even know, you don't know what's what anymore.
It's awful.
And has the, has this interrupted your This Alex Jones part of it, has this interrupted your work life?
It took a while before I could go back to work, and I was fortunate in that the company I was working for was very understanding, and they gave me some time to sort of get myself together before I went back.
But when this really ramped up, and when a lot of this was going on, It was very hard to be at the office.
It was difficult to concentrate.
It was difficult to focus on anything.
After I had been back at the office for a little while, I became aware of two fake Twitter accounts.
I didn't use Twitter.
I wasn't on Twitter at the time.
And I became aware, I was made aware of two fake Twitter accounts that were put up in my name and in my wife's name, using images they'd found on the Internet from stuff we had done in the past.
And these were, you know, Very, you know, saying like, you know, posting stuff like, you know, I'm the best liar, I'm an actor, I'm a liar, I, you know, I've fooled, I've got you all fooled and stuff like that.
And, you know, just, it was awful.
You know, very sarcastic and belittling.
And do you have any sense as you sit here today as to how many millions or tens of millions of people out there believe that you manipulated the situation for some ulterior motive, that it didn't exist, that Ben didn't exist, or that you're part of a hoax?
Through the course of the events of being here in this trial, I've seen the size of the audiences we're talking about, and I've seen some of those numbers, and it You know, at the time, I sort of put it out of my head.
I tried not to think about it too much.
But it's quite clear that it was enormous and significant.
Did people, did you have people, anybody invading your own private property?
Yes, yes.
Did you tell a jury about that?
Yes.
And when?
So in the days and weeks after...
A number of times.
And fortunately, both of these situations were dealt with by this friend of ours who was helping us.
Someone came to the house.
She told us that somebody had come to the house, knocked on the door, and she opened the door, and this person demanded to see Ben.
I know he's here.
I know he's alive.
And she dispatched with that person, and then another person came to the house in the guise of being a reporter, telling her that he was a reporter, but then saying things that she knew were just, you know, didn't sound right, and he didn't have any credentials, and so that, you know, sent him away.
And Ben had an older brother.
Nate was how old again?
Nate was nine when Ben was killed in fourth grade.
You and Francine had to care for Nate.
Can you tell us in terms of a parent from your point of view?
How did this Alex Jones part of it affect your relationship with Nate?
How did you deal with this with Nate, if at all?
That was really, really hard.
I had to sit him down at one point when this stuff was starting to really get into the news and people were starting to be aware of it and people started to talk about it.
The last thing I wanted was for some kid to say something on the bus or for him to hear it on the playground or something, you know?
And so we had to sit him down and I had to tell him what was happening.
Obviously, he said, why?
Why is this happening?
And I didn't have an answer.
I didn't have an answer.
You couldn't answer his question?
I couldn't.
I didn't know what to tell him.
And did you observe how that affected Naver?
How did Nate deal with it, and what was the impact on you?
Compound judge, relevance, relevance, and compound.
Nate reacted to this situation by...
He wanted to remain completely and totally anonymous.
He didn't want anyone knowing who he was.
He didn't want anyone giving him special treatment for any reason.
He didn't want to be associated with it at all.
And the idea that we were now the focus of some other kind of notoriety or some other kind of Spotlight was being put on us was difficult for him.
So he didn't want to be singled out as a result of being the brother of Benjamin at the shooting?
Yes, that's correct.
And he didn't want the people to know him for another reason because of what was going on with Alex Jones?
Right.
And for years he would ask me why anyone would ever do such a thing.
Why anyone like Alex Jones?
Why Alex Jones would say these things?
Why anyone would say these things?
And for you as a parent, how did you absorb that?
Well, we had to have conversations about it.
I mean, we had to sit down and talk about it.
I had to try to explain to him my thoughts of why someone might do this.
You mentioned you're fledgling.
Am I overstating your acting career?
You might be.
Did you have some student films or films?
Yeah, I did.
Years ago, I did a student film with a guy who I I think he was an NYU film student.
That's common fodder for young actors in the city trying to get a leg up there.
You know, you get a student film and So I did that, yeah.
And so you had some online footprint of some kind?
Right.
So that film was up on YouTube.
Can you tell the jury whether that became used in any way?
Oh, yeah, it absolutely did.
I mean, hoaxers grabbed it and pointed to it as proof that it was a hoax, proof that I was an actor, the fact that I was in this film.
Implying that everything about me was fake and false.
And, you know, the guy, and I hadn't talked to him in years, the guy who made the film, you know, he didn't know what to do.
We didn't know what to do.
And in what way were these people using the film to make the case?
Oh, so they would take it and cut it up and edit it and post it in parts of other videos as proof that I wasn't a real person and I didn't have a family and I didn't have a son.
What was that like for you?
It's very distressing.
You know, it kind of makes you second guess everything.
What do you mean by that?
Well, you know, I'd rack my brain about what else was out there that someone would get a hold of and try to use in some way like this.
And it was demeaning.
It felt like It felt like being delegitimized in a way.
Basically, it makes you feel like you don't matter.
It makes you feel like what you went through doesn't matter.
Now acting may, you may not have been the most successful actor ever, but do you consider acting, your acting past as part of your identity?
Sure.
Sure.
I mean, I spent 20 years trying to do it, you know.
And so to have that used as, and it's hard, it's really hard, it's not an easy thing to do, so to have that used as some sort of ammunition against me as a person is really awful.
And did there come a time—oh, you were here when Bill Oliver testified.
Yes, yes I was.
And Bill, I believe, if I recall correctly, I actually apologize to you, but can you tell us, did there come a time when you became aware of some Part of this whole Alex Jones piece that had you tell me what happened.
So after a while, I'd been, you know, sort of looking to see what was out there, what people were saying, and I came across this thing that the idea that people were posting that Bill Aldenberg and I were the same person, that I played two parts.
in the tragedy that I was playing the grieving dad and playing the FBI agent, and then we were actually the same person.
You know, and it's insane. and it's insane.
It's just absolutely insane.
Did you know Bill Aldenberg?
No.
No.
When was the first time you met Bill Aldenberg?
I first met Bill summer before last.
He emailed me and asked me if we could have coffee.
And I invited him to our house.
Are you talking about 2021?
Yeah, yeah.
That's the first time you met him.
I believe it was.
I'm trying to establish that.
I believe it was, yeah.
I believe it was.
Okay, sorry.
It's certainly, yeah, I believe it was summer before last, summer of 2021. And so I invited him to the house and we sat outside and talked.
Did you tell the jury about what you observed about Bill's, about that discussion, what you observed about your own...
Right.
It was a hard conversation for both of us, but it was very hard for Bill because it became very clear to me almost immediately that he felt a tremendous amount of responsibility for what had happened to me.
Because of what he went through that morning.
And it became clear to me that he had come to apologize, which was, of course, ridiculous.
He had no reason to apologize.
There's nothing that he did that would merit any kind of an apology to me.
But I respect him for doing it.
It was not easy for either of us.
But I have a lot of respect for Bill.
What was he specifically apologizing for?
Jackson Hearsay.
But it's all his damages.
Sustained.
Bill Aldenberg's damages.
That's Mr. Aldenberg, Jackson, you're saying.
Okay, I'll stop.
The...
You were in court when we played Alex Jones' video within three hours of the Sandy Hook.
Yeah.
And is this December 14th?
Will this be the 10-year anniversary of the Sandy Hook shooting?
Yes.
And will it be the 10-year anniversary of Alex Jones' lies about you?
Yes.
And can you tell...
Can you tell the jury whether this Alex Jones piece affects your feelings of security to this day?
Yes.
Can you explain that to the jury?
Yes.
When we first learned about what people were saying and how they were behaving regarding these theories, this conspiracy stuff, we became very aware this conspiracy stuff, we became very aware of being in large crowds.
We would often make a decision about going somewhere, whether or not we were going to be with friends or have friends around us, or if it was a place where we felt safe or comfortable, how many people would be there.
There were a number of situations for me personally.
I was invited to around 2014, I was invited to talk to some college students about my experience, the things that I had learned that I didn't know before the shooting, the things I had learned in the time since.
And so I started giving a presentation to college students, and every time I would be asked, I would make sure that there was a security person, an officer of some kind in the room, Because I was concerned.
And did you notice this concern in Francine?
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, sure.
More so than me.
Yes.
Can you explain that?
Sure.
She was afraid of being attacked.
She was afraid of being harassed.
And, you know, in the immediate days and weeks after, we would, you know, if we had to go somewhere, all of the families had a law enforcement officer assigned to them on December 14th in the afternoon.
And we had a Connecticut State Trooper assigned to our family.
And so when we would go anywhere, we would go in his car.
He would drive us.
And he would put his dress uniforms in the windows.
So that no one could see in.
Because we didn't, you know, we were, as performers, we were already sort of public people in a way.
And so we were, you know, making sure that that opportunity for someone to do something didn't arise.
Or we tried.
And you said you moved to Newtown in 2007, or San Diego, right?
Yeah, that's right.
So you were there for approximately five years?
Yes.
And had you ever felt insecure or unsafe in your own home in Newtown?
God, no.
No, no.
What do you mean?
No.
I mean, it's a terrific community.
You know, the first...
Right after we moved in...
Someone had left a phone book.
You know how they used to deliver phone books in plastic bags?
Somebody left a phone book at the bottom of the driveway, you know, the way they used to do.
And somehow, I don't know if it was a cigarette flicked out of a window as a car drove by or something, but I came out one morning and saw this phone book had been left in the driveway, and it was burned.
It was all, and this is 2008. Seven or eight, I suppose, very soon after we moved in.
And it had caught fire.
And I called the local police and I was like, what is this?
You know, I just come from Queens.
I was like, what is this?
And they said, no, no, no.
No, that doesn't happen here.
No, not here.
And did you ever get to the bottom of what?
Never got to the bottom of the burned fire.
And so, and had you, when you went out into the community in Newtown, did you ever feel any feelings that people were looking at you strange or anything like that prior to all this?
No.
No, no.
What's it like so you what's it like to have this feeling of safety and security taken away?
Can you tell the jury, just in your own words?
I didn't want to admit it for a long time.
I didn't want these kinds of behaviors, I didn't want the stuff that was being said about us to change my life.
I didn't want to give in.
It made me feel like I had lost somehow or something.
So I was stubborn about getting a home security system because I didn't want to admit that that was a reality.
And I ended up getting one because I realized that these fears are not unfounded.
Did you say you were a stand-up comic at one point?
I never really did.
I tried, you know, in the context of this variety show that my friend and I had, I tried it once or twice.
Have you been heckled before, a time or two?
I try to avoid situations where that might happen, but I suppose.
Isn't this just a bunch of heckling?
Can't you just turn the channel?
Isn't Alex Jones just Dennis the Menace?
No.
No, no.
Why not?
This is my life.
This isn't something I'm trying to put over on somebody.
Who's Dennis the Menace, by the way?
A cartoon character, as far as I remember.
I think there was a TV show, too.
Do you find Alex Jones to be funny?
No.
Has Alex Jones harmed you and your family?
Yes.
Has he destroyed your name?
Or tried to, at least?
Yeah.
But he hasn't, has it?
No.
So what?
So if he hasn't destroyed your name...
Well, you know, every time he uttered the words, crisis actor, I know he was talking about me.
And us.
You know?
Did you do anything ever to Alex Jones to warrant this attack?
No.
Are these lies about you?
Of course not.
Are these lies about Ben?
No.
Thank you very much.
I will move for the questions.
Attorney Pettis.
I think it's morning.
Morning, Mr. Wheeler.
Good morning.
We met via Zoom on an occasion where a colleague of mine deposed you.
Yes.
It's good to meet you and I'm sorry for your loss.
Thank you.
Prior to your son's murder, had you ever heard the name Alex Jones?
Yes.
How had you heard it?
Just in a sort of a general awareness of an internet personality.
And after the murder of your son, I believe his name was used.
Do you need something, sir?
I was looking for a trash can.
Sorry.
After your son's murder, I believe you said a friend of yours who was house-sitting, well, who had come to care for you in the way that this mentioned that he was using your, or he was referring to San Diego, correct?
Yes.
He never, are you aware, have you seen any video where he's named you or used your name?
No.
Have you seen anything in print where he's named you or used your name?
No.
You're aware, are you aware that, and you saw, did you see that you were in court and saw the video that was posted hours within, after hours of your son's shooting, correct?
Yes.
And had you seen that video before, seeing it in court here?
No.
Or did you become aware?
Well, I'm sorry, let me correct that.
I may have seen it in the time that I was starting to research.
I saw a number of his videos in the weeks and months following as I sort of became more able to Take these things in.
Okay.
Did you see it before you accompanied your wife when she stood in for President Obama to give a weekly address?
I don't recall.
You appeared with her.
This is, uh...
Sustained.
May we approach, Judge?
I think I'm looking at the scope of your line.
I'd like to be heard.
Briefly, maybe we approach for...
Well, why don't you...
Yes.
So this is...
You're asking...
He doesn't know.
And so the question, and this is the only question.
No, no, no, no.
You've got to stay on the ground.
I know, but I'm not going to stay on the ground.
No, no, no, I can't.
Otherwise, we'll have to do it.
Right, okay.
He appeared with his wife to give a message, and she gave a message in lieu of President Obama to urge the Senate to pass gun control legislation.
And I believe that...
He appeared with her wife to get the presidential address along with his wife to urge the Senate to take gun control legislation.
And I think there's his attitude toward guns.
He saw the video where Alex was talking about our guns, our guns, our guns.
He's introducing us.
We're introducing us.
That's what he said.
Let's move it off the politics and focus on his views on guns and his gun activities.
So you can ask him if his gun activities are and his views are.
My view, and I think, Judge, I understand you disagreeing and I'm trying as an Australian court to understand the disagreement.
This is the problem of getting into this.
It's a one, it's like an imperceptible logic.
If there is.
If there is a moment.
I think I've laid the foundation for this question.
Sorry.
At some point.
Yes, at some point.
There's no foundation yet that he knows about how it's Jones' position about God's work, and we don't know if his position is about God, and we have no idea what his concept is.
Well, when he stands, when he sits next to his wife on national television to address the Senate.
But we're making a lot of politics in the morning.
No, it's a government.
There's no foundation.
You've got to set the foundation yet.
So I'll sustain the objection and do it.
So the objection is sustained.
Did the Alex Jones, did the shooting of your son at Sandy Hook Elementary School change your view about gun safety?
Objection.
There's no foundation.
Why don't we first see if he had any views?
Did you have views about gun control and gun safety prior to the Sandy Hook shooting?
Not particularly.
Did the shooting change your view?
Objection.
There's no foundation that David Wheeler has any understanding laid.
Excuse me, I'm afraid.
There's no foundation established that David Wheeler knows or knew about Mr. Jones's position on guns.
That has to be laid first.
I agree, so...
Okay, sir, you were sitting in court throughout the trial, correct?
Yes.
Objection.
You've seen the video of Mr. Jones saying they're coming for our guns within hours of your sudden shooting, correct?
Yes.
Objection.
He hasn't established when...
So right now we know that during the trial he saw that video.
You saw the video before this trial, correct?
I may have.
I honestly don't recall.
At any point, did you become aware that Alex Jones believed that the Sandy Hook shooting was a pretext for coming after guns of the Americans?
Objection.
Overruled.
When did you become aware of that?
I couldn't honestly tell you.
I don't remember exactly.
At some point when I started becoming aware of what was being said and what he was saying, it became clear that that was part of this presentation of his.
You say at some point, would that have been in the weeks after your son's shooting, while you were emerging from this fog?
More, yes.
Generally speaking, at some point, I would say within probably two to three months at the outside.
You accompanied your wife to give a national, when she gave a national address on April 16th.
So this question, right?
That would be a good idea.
All right.
So we'll just bear with us.
You'll put your notebooks down.
Let me just see what time it is.
You know, this is actually a good time for the morning recess anyway.
We're just approaching it.
So we'll give you a 20-minute recess, and we will stay on the record to address this issue.
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Corral.
Shall we excuse the witness?
I'll use the plan if I'm not sure we can.
Please be seated.
Or we don't need to.
I don't think we can excuse him.
We don't need him on the stand.
Mr. David, you can step down.
I didn't know if there was going to be an offer or something.
Are we moving into the break, Judge?
After this, but now we're on the record and we're going to deal with this issue.
So there's a foundation now that at some point within two to three months after the shooting, the witness became aware of Mr. Jones' I
I don't want to hear your argument on that.
Tell me what your argument is.
Right.
And I think, and I believe I understand the position is that it has some relevance to damages, but in order to have relevance in that way of thinking, there has to be a foundation that each, for each individual plaintiff, that they are even aware of Mr. Jones' position on gun.
I think that he's laying the foundation, but we're having a lot of objections.
So there's testimony now that This witness became aware of Mr. Jones' platforms on guns.
Didn't say that he knew what it was, just that he became aware.
- It needs to be specifically established foundation or there's absolutely no probative value or relevance to this claim of bias or motive.
And that's just a fundamental-- - Well, I don't disagree with you, the attorney Pascot, so he became aware that Mr. Jones had a platform on guns.
We don't have any evidence yet of what it is that he was aware of.
Attorney Pattis?
I disagree in part and may not recall.
No, I, so.
He became aware that He saw a video here.
He doesn't recall when he first saw it.
Did you become aware at some point that Mr. Jones had a position on firearms?
Yes.
When did you become aware?
You know, I'm going to play this back because I think it's important enough.
So why don't we hold off?
I'll ask the monitor to get to that point.
So, I think where Attorney Pettis started talking about prior to the Sandy Hook shooting, what was your position?
Did you have a position?
Let's start from there.
Thank you.
Yes.
Just sort of a general awareness of an internet personality.
And after your son has used his name was used to be in the public service?
I was looking for a trash can.
Sorry.
I was looking for a trash can.
And after your son's word, at least a friend of yours is about sitting, who would come to care for you?
Yes.
I was looking for a video.
Yes.
You mentioned that he was using your, or he was referring to Sandy Hook, right?
Yes.
He was saying, are you aware of any video where he's saying, maybe you can use your name?
No.
Did you see anything in French or the name of your agent?
No.
Yes.
You're aware, are you aware that, and you saw, did you see that you or your board saw a video that was posted in hours, within, after hours of your son's shooting?
Yes.
No.
I'm sorry, let me correct that.
I may have seen it in the time that I was starting to research Did you see it before you that accompanied your wife when she stood in for President Obama to keep the address?
I don't recall.
Um, you appeared with our question.
Sustained.
May we appreciate it.
I'd like to be heard.
After you may be a part of the church.
Well, why don't you?
Yes.
And then what happens?
So the objection is to school.
The objection is the foundation.
Well, why don't we first see any views?
Well, he didn't have views about that old safety part of the St. Louis.
Well, not particularly.
Is he going to change your direction?
Yeah, sure.
There's no foundation that David will ask, and his understanding of the school.
There's no foundation staff.
And those who are new, Mr. Jones' position on Jones, that's a new way to...
I agree.
So...
So you were saying, you've seen the video of Mr. Jones saying they're coming for her guns within hours for your son to shoot.
Yes.
Right?
Objection.
He hasn't established his name.
So right now we know that during the trial he saw that video.
I may have, I promise you don't have to call.
At any point did you become aware that Alex Jones will be in the same way that he was a pretext for coming after the gun?
Objection.
When did you become aware of it?
I couldn't honestly tell you.
I don't remember exactly.
At some point when I started becoming aware of what was being said and what he was saying, it became clear that that was part of this presentation.
You say at some point that it means after your son did you think, quote, you were emerging from this fog?
Yes.
Generally speaking, at some point, I would say within So we'll just bear with us.
We'll put the notebooks down.
Let me just see what time it is.
You know, this is actually a good time for the morning recess anyway.
We were just approaching it.
So we'll leave you a 20-minute test and we'll stay on the record.
He accompanied his wife.
I'll be back on the floor.
I believe I have the foundation to ask the following question.
On April 13th, in April 2013, did you accompany your wife to sit alongside her as she gave a national address urging the Senate to pass gun control legislation?
I believe I've laid the foundation.
He became aware of Mr. Jones's position at two to three months at the outside after his son later than March 31st, and this is within weeks of that.
So I believe I have laid the foundation, and that's the only question I intend to ask at this point.
There's no only question exception to an improper question.
There's no, there's absolutely been no foundation laid.
That David Wheeler, this gentleman, understood and knew what Alex Jones' position was on guns, what he had heard.
I agree.
I think you have to lay a better foundation.
Okay, I can do it.
Okay.
So we will take our 15-minute recess.
What time does that put us at, Ron?
The 11.45.
At 11.45.
Judge, if I have asked the court reporter to mark a portion of the transcript where he said that he became I'm asking if that portion of the transcript where he said he became aware of the position of Mr. Jones and thinking that taking guns away was part of the whole San Diego thing at the outset, within two or three months after his son's death.
I'm asking if that'd be marked.
For what purpose?
If I get testimony at variance with that, I don't know what's going to happen during the break, but it's my contention the foundation is currently adequate.
I suspect he may or may not be prepared to testify, and if it's at variance with that, I'll impeach him with what he said 10 minutes in.
The donations have just been ruled to be in at.
We'll take a recess.
We're not standing at 15 minutes before we're in recess.
Do we need a garbage can here, Ronald?
Oh, thank you very much.
Alright, so I've given it some thought over the break, and As we all know, this is a hearing in damages, and this trial is not about presidential elections or presidents.
And I think that the defense is improperly injecting politics into the case unnecessarily, and I can't permit that.
So I just want to get back to make sure that We don't have this problem with every witness.
So I think once there's a foundation laid that the witness knew what Mr. Jones' platform or position on gun control was, that it would be proper, as this was my ruling yesterday, to elicit his views, if any, on the issue and his activities, if any, on the witness.
Because as I understand it, the defense wants to show that any particular witness could be biased or prejudiced against the defendants when testifying about the extent of their damages because they don't like the defendant's position on gun control.
We can't have it in a way that We're bringing presidents and elections into it, so that is not going to work.
And this is...
It's not really...
It's not what I was trying to rule on.
So the fact that he's supporting there at this event doesn't mean anything except for that It could mean something, but it really doesn't mean anything.
He could have been there just to be supportive of his spouse, which is something that many spouses do.
So where are you going with this, Attorney Mattis?
The question is, assuming that can lay the appropriate foundation, which I believe I already have, but if the court disagrees, that's fine.
He appeared...
Well, can you just educate me then?
Because I remember that he said Before Sandy Hook, you didn't have any particular views about gun safety or gun control?
Correct.
And then I believe I asked him if he was aware of it at some point.
Did he become aware of the video?
And how this was all associated with the crazy.
I don't remember what it was.
I asked the telephone to be marked.
that Jones and Joseph I've done were related to the views he was thinking about Sandy Hook.
And he became aware of these views no more than two to three months after the shooting, which we put it in about March 31st at the latest.
Two weeks later, assuming the March 31st date is the date, he appears with his wife while she gave the substitute weekly address that the president typically gives.
It was not an attempt to inject politics, it was an attempt to describe the forum.
This is a forum, presumably one of the most prestigious forum in the United States, if a president permits you to address the nation on his behalf.
I assume, and I think if he accompanied his wife Excuse me,
uh, the, this is, first of all, there's, this was, Alex Jones did not express his views about guns in any of that material that the jury has seen.
He has simply accused the Plaintiffs that lied, established lie, about the plaintiffs being part of a conspiracy hoax, they're fraudulent actors, to advance an agenda to take away people's guns.
He put that on the plaintiffs.
But that's not an expression of his views, such that the court has deemed an admissible motive kind of thing would allow.
In fact, That's just a lie.
It's not a view.
It's not a belief.
It's a lie.
So we can't piggyback on that claim as some kind of a foundation.
It's a problem.
Well, the argument is simply incoherent.
Whether this court has ruled that Mr. Jones has lied and didn't believe it at the time, he said it doesn't matter.
That's why, on cross-application, I have a right to challenge the voted bias in the outcome.
He was asked by Attorney Koskoff whether he saw films in here that were shown within hours of the Young Mr. Jones is referring to San Diego State for the purposes of taking guns.
I don't know what, I'll leave my show.
So here's what I would say.
If you want to ask him about what activities he's engaged in by way of giving speeches or lobbying or whatever it is that you're going to do, that you have a good faith basis to do, that's one thing.
But I'm not going to go down the road of politics and Obama and presidential elections and all that.
I accompany my husband on a lot of things just to be supportive, not because I agree with his politics or for any other reason.
So that is just pure speculation.
But I'm entitled If he wants to disavow him, then let him do it.
You can ask him what his views are.
Your Honor, excuse me.
I'm sorry.
I accepted on the record.
That does not solve the foundation problem that we're dealing with.
There is no problem.
Excuse me.
We're endorsing a lie.
I think what I heard, counsel, we're not going to be back to day one on this, are we?
Where you're interrupting each other and interrupting me?
No.
So what I heard was that he did not have any particular views before Sandy Hook, and that at some point, two or three months afterwards, afterwards, he became aware of Alex Jones position or platforms on guns.
But A, that's not what you said, and B, that, that, what is allegedly a position or viewpoint on guns was a lie that Alex Jones made up and is the very centerpiece of this case.
So what we're doing is we're enlarging that as a position- I understand, but you're now re-arguing- Attorney Koscoff, you're re-arguing what I said.
You can't re-argue.
It was what Alex Jones stated, so I suppose the question of whether he became aware of what Alex Jones said on the broadcast is the question, and I think that Attorney Pattis can explore it.
However, Attorney Pattis, not with injected politics into it, presidential elections, and you haven't asked him if his views changed or what his views were.
And I think that the fact that he went with his wife to a function and sat there mute is of no value to this jury.
Possibly, unless he says, I only went because I loved her.
I mean, I'm not going to lend my name and wife this to something I disagree with.
Much though I love my wife, if she endorsed a view that I didn't agree with or found her above her, I wouldn't agree with her.
You can ask him about his views and activities, but I think accompanying his wife to that event is too far afield.
But you can...
So in terms of the foundation, I'm not seeing the foundation, and I don't believe it's established a community.
Can this be laid outside the presence of the jury?
I'm not laying the foundation outside the presence of the jury.
No, it's not going to happen.
Excuse me.
I'm asking the court, sir.
Can I have a sidebar?
Don't cover the makeup.
Thank you.
How can we do this in a way that we're not going to have this problem if every witness can start to get your jury?
I have a suggestion.
Oh, good.
Well, it's not his witness, so first of all, so I don't want to be protruded.
I think the problem is Attorney Poshkos.
I'm actually speaking.
If he continues to...
Attorney Poshkos, he had a...
A suggestion, and I'm going to hear it.
And then we'll see if you have a suggestion.
But I don't want to keep doing this over and over again.
Here's what I understand to be the court's position.
If Attorney Pattis can establish that a plaintiff knew about Mr. Jones's views on guns, then he can probe whether that view biased them in any way towards exaggerating their damages.
All right, so let's see.
What do you disagree with?
I don't.
Okay, good.
This is good.
So it seems to me that to lay that foundation in a way that we're not having this over and over and over again is to say to a witness when you're ready to get to that, are you or have you ever been aware of what Mr. Jones's views on guns are?
Now the reason I think it needs to be done that way as opposed to saying, you heard him say in the video, Is because what Attorney Patz was just saying was, you saw that Mr. Jones believed that Sandy Hook was a pretext for gun control.
That is a different question than, are you aware of what Mr. Jones' views on guns specifically are?
If they're not, which by the way, we all need to acknowledge could be very varied, right?
I believe in the Second Amendment, absolutely.
Or Jones believes in the Second Amendment, absolutely.
Or believes in certain restrictions.
I disagree with that characterization.
I got a little confused when you were asking when was the first time you saw the video, you saw the video today.
We'll clear that up here.
I cut you off and I apologize.
No, that's right, go ahead.
The issue is, Attorney Koskoff continues to re-argue an issue that he lost.
And he's tutoring his witnesses with the objections in the jury's presence and probably talking to him in the hall.
This is race judicata.
They didn't even like the ruling, but it's going to happen over and over again unless you admonish him.
No, there's no jury in the room.
It's going to happen over and over again unless he's admonished as race judicata.
How can we do this in a way?
There's not politics.
It's the stage he appeared on.
But I understand the court doesn't want me to refer to that.
I just think if you could just say, do you know what Mr. Jones' views on guns are?
And if the witness says no, I'm not trying to tutor you.
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to tutor you.
So where are we going now?
I'm going to lay the foundation and then go do it.
We are on the record.
We're not going to inject politics in it.
I don't think I had, by appearing at that address, that it was the nature of the forum, so I will simply say a national forum if the issue comes up.
I can't keep extending the objection to this.
Well, we're on the record, so you have the objection to all of this.
I mean, I don't want to make a mountain out of them all.
Oh, you're doing it.
So I think national forum is a little more neutral.
You're right.
I'm sorry.
And it could be a national forum of lawyers.
I do just think, though, that, I mean, perhaps you disagree, Judge, that when...
We do disagree on this issue.
I'm not talking about the larger issue.
I'm talking about the foundational question.
If Mr. Wheeler has said, I understood that Mr. Jones was saying San Diego was a pretext for gun control, that is a different answer than I know what his views are on guns themselves, as opposed to I know what he's saying about a pretext.
There's his views, and there's what he says on the show, and then there's...
The other thing I need to understand, so we don't do this again.
Just one minute, one sec.
I've spoken to Attorney Kaskar too.
Can I just backtrack for a second?
Are we talking about his stated views?
Because that's all anybody could understand is what his stated views are.
Well, this is where I don't understand the Attorney Kaskar's claim that because the law of the case is that Jones lied when he said these things by operation of law and the default, I don't think that's relevant because I think it's how this witness took the views, whether they were lies or not.
The views is, I guess, what I'm saying.
Listen, this is really very simple.
Do you have any knowledge?
Do you know what his stated views with respect to guns are, right?
That's what you want to know.
That's what you want to know.
I think I've already got it, but I'll get it again.
No, but I'm just saying that that's really what you want to know.
Some people, maybe not people, would say, I have no idea what Alex Jones stated views on guns.
If it's not clear enough for the plaintiff to help clarify, I'll just be curious.
Can I just say something?
This is all very confusing anyway.
Why don't we just do it simpler so that we know what we're doing with the jury.
So what were the stated view?
What were Alex Jones?
Do you know what Alex Jones stated views were?
And do you have any views?
And then what are your activities?
That's one way to do it.
I'd prefer a different, but that's fine.
Well, I think if you do it that way, we have less chance of having to jump up and down every time.
But I like the National Forum as more neutral, but we're not going to, I'm not going to...
And just, I'll use National Forum because I understand you're ruling, but I want the record to be clear that I think it's error and I'm not going to accept it.
It's on the record.
Everyone thinks it's error, so I've got, everyone disagrees with the ruling.
You've already said that appearing at a National Forum is not...
Well, every time, I'm gonna tell you what I'm gonna do now every time, because we are, this is a hearing of damages.
Anytime I hear anything with politics coming up, Trump, Obama, Clinton, any of that stuff, I'm going to just tell the jury that this case is not about politics, it's not about presidents, and it's not about presidential elections.
I think what you should say, and I don't want to tell you how to do your job, but I think those topics are going to come up with our approach so we can avoid this.
Yes.
Because otherwise we're going to be up here.
They've, in their own exhibits, put Trump in our office.
I will ask to approach, I will take this as a standing order that if a political name is going to come up, we should approach it.
Can I just ask if the gun wants to be?
Well, the exhibits they put in are half, that's part, that's your, go ahead.
I'm going to be honest, if guns are relevant, We said politics.
Of course they're not.
Maybe it's just easier to see that in the firm politics.
It's the same kind of thing.
I understand, but it's a hot issue.
It is the reason for both.
But it's the only issue that would Given how the children died, okay, with AR-15s and guns, that's something that people could have very strong opinions about.
So that's why it's...
Be careful there.
Look, I am not going after Soto versus Bushmaster.
This man made claims about the importance of Soto versus Bushmaster.
I'm not going here.
I mean, I understand it's narrow.
So can we all agree that before any presidential election or president's name or hopeful president candidate or anything along those lines come up, you'll ask for a sidebar and excuse the jury so we don't make this case about politics.
Okay?
Well, guns are, sadly.
I'm talking about presidents, presidential election, and I understand that it's a political issue.
They're equally weighted in terms of politics.
That's just re-arguing the motion.
It is.
Okay, we're ready for the jury.
Yes.
I'll take that as a yes.
Thank you.
Welcome back.
now Now I'm counting to nine, be careful.
Counting to nine instead of 10, sadly.
All right.
Council will stipulate that the entire panel has Yes,
thank you.
I want to return to some difficult days in your life, the days following her son's murder.
And I've forgotten the name of the woman who came to stay with you.
You told us at your deposition.
Right, the woman who came and helped us.
A family, a very, very close family friend named Kimberly Evans.
And it was Ms. Evans who alerted you that Alex Jones was saying things about San Diego.
Yes.
That it was Alex.
Yes.
That you were an actor.
Yes.
That your son hadn't really been murdered.
Yes.
Did she tell you that Alex Jones was talking at all about the Second Amendment or guns when she told you those things?
No.
Now, at some point you concluded that you wanted to Yes.
As part of my sort of general search to see what was out there being said about me and about us.
And you saw some things that Alex Jones said.
Yes.
Can we see one E, please?
So is that one of the things you saw following your son's death?
I believe I did see this clip at some point in those months first following.
When Alex Jones said they are going to come after our guns, did he appear to you to be eaten?
He looked like he was linking the claim of false fake deaths with their coming after our guns, wasn't it?
I understood him to be saying that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax, and that hoax was being used to further a gun control agenda.
So you knew his view was about guns?
No.
Did you think that he was saying it was a hoax to further a gun control agenda because he wanted firearms restricted?
I don't know.
You really don't?
I really don't.
Okay.
So he might have been saying this like, They're using Sandy Hooks as a hoax to come after our guns and I hope they succeed because guns are dangerous.
That might be what he was saying?
I don't know.
Okay, but you didn't draw any inferences.
I couldn't draw any inferences.
Let's look at the rest of the video.
Magically it happens.
They are coming.
They've already taken over health care.
The Canadians are doubling.
They're bankrupting that.
They already shipped GM to China.
They are going to gut this country.
They're going to shut down the power plants.
They're going to bankrupt us.
They are re-educating us.
Just like we were Ukrainians.
And they're Russians.
They want us bankrupt.
They want the counties and the cities bankrupted and federalized.
Defends themselves from my laws.
What does the new magazine say?
You can get it by subscribing.
You can get 12 issues.
This man wants your guns.
And I blank down here.
They're declaring war on.
On what will finish?
They're declaring war on the Second Amendment.
Second Amendment period.
They are declaring.
They're declaring war on the Second Amendment period.
At the time, did you have any understanding what the Second Amendment was?
Of course.
I don't think it's been established that the ruler saw this part of it.
He said he saw this video.
I don't know that I saw the whole video.
I don't.
Did you talk to your lawyers in the break while the jury was out?
Did you have a conversation with them?
I talk to them all the time.
Did you have a conversation with them during the break while the jury was out?
Yes.
Was anyone other than your lawyers or people associated with their firm present during those discussions?
Some of the discussions.
No, the conversations today in the hallway During the break, we're in a conference room.
Was anyone other than your lawyers and their staff and other plaintiffs present with you during this discussion?
No.
So you viewed some portion of this table, and you just can't say that you know what Alex Jones's position on guns were.
Is that right?
Whatever portion of this you viewed, you just couldn't discern what his position was, correct?
Everything that seems to come out of his mouth is an obvious lie.
I cannot discern what his personal positions are, no.
Not personally, no.
What does that mean?
No, I've never spoken to him, so I don't know what his personal position on firearms are.
I don't know.
Not, I mean, how many of his videos have I personally seen?
Right.
Not counting the four, five, six times we've seen this one.
Right.
No more than a dozen.
All of which would be accurately described as clips relating specifically to my experience.
Has the shooting of your son changed your view regarding gun safety and gun control?
Objection.
Overruled.
Not particularly.
Do you now favor gun?
Not at all or not particularly?
if there's a difference?
This is a complicated answer.
I'll take it.
I have always been in favor of responsible firearms ownership.
I continue to be in favor of responsible firearms ownership.
I'm also in favor of responsible motor vehicle operation and continue.
I'm talking about cars, sir.
So is it your testimony, sir, that nothing about your son's murder at the Sandy Hook Elementary School by a man with an AR-15 changed your view to spot guns?
Is that your testimony?
What kind of guns?
Any.
Any guns.
Right.
It did change my view about some guns.
And you have urged Congress to help change gun laws, have you not?
Objection.
I think it's a fair question whether this witness has urged Congress to change gun laws.
I did, in April of 2013, visit Washington and speak to some legislators, yes.
And you accompanied your wife when she addressed the nation on a national forum.
Is she urging?
That was objected to.
Attorney Pat, just one second please.
And the objection was sustained.
And I just want to point this following out to the jury, and I'll do this any time That's necessary.
And I know that you said National Forum.
This case is not about elections or presidents or presidential elections or politics.
So you should keep that in mind.
So if you want to Well, I think that the accompanying your wife is not going to be permitted.
Did you appear on a national platform where Congress was urged to enact gun safety regulations in April of 2013?
In the presidential address, yes.
Nothing further, Judge.
Redirect.
I want you to explain to the jury why did the Sandy Hook shooting that took the life of your son, what was the weapon that was used?
It was a Bushmaster AR-15.
I forget the exact model number.
And when you were growing up, did you ever have one of those weapons?
No.
Did you have any experience with firearms?
Yes.
Can you tell the jury what that was?
My dad had a Remington 22 rifle that we kept in the house.
When I turned 10, as he did with my older brother, I was allowed to go out with him and learn how to target shoot and learn how to safely operate the rifle.
And then in college we, you know, we would put bottles and golf balls on tops of bottles and try to get the golf ball without breaking the bottle.
Did you have any success?
Not much.
And then when I was in college a good friend of mine and I had another friend who was an enthusiast and we went to a firearms range in Bolinas California, and spent a day learning how to operate handguns.
We had a.45, it was a Sig Sauer, it was a 9mm, and this was one of those ranges where they would The targets were manipulated, so they would come out from behind a tree, and it was a drawing of a person, and you had to figure out right away whether that person was a threat or not, whether they were carrying a shotgun or a pair of binoculars or something.
And so, again, this was all handguns, and this was an active course, so you moved through the course as these things sort of came up from behind barricades and came up from behind trees, and then you had to, you know, use the target range that way.
So we did that.
That was, I think, my junior or senior year in college that I did that.
And is losing a son in this situation, did that change your view on certain types of firearms?
Yes.
Can you explain to the jury what that did to you?
I didn't understand, I didn't know what a consumer, I didn't know how military style assault weapons were available to consumers.
I didn't know anything about AR-15s.
I didn't know anything about that kind of weapon, what is commonly known as a black rifle, or some of those other terms you've heard.
I just didn't know anything about them.
And when the news came out about the weapon that was used to murder my son and his classmates and teachers, and the specifics of that weapon, and the availability of such a thing, I found it shocking.
I was aghast.
I couldn't believe it.
So, in as much as I had general feelings about rifles, those changed considerably when I learned more about that particular product, that consumer product.
And I think it was brought out that you went to Congress?
Yes.
Okay.
Now, changes in any regulations regarding those particular type of military firearms aren't going to bring your son back.
Of course.
Why would you do that?
Because one of the first things I recognized after Ben was murdered Was that if this could happen to me, in our little town, it could happen to anybody.
Are you proud of making those efforts on behalf?
Yes, of course.
Thank you very much.
Attorney Patis?
So if it could happen to your son in your hometown, it could happen to anyone, right?
Yes.
And the purpose of changing the regulation was to hopefully prevent that prayer?
Yes.
The purpose of bringing this suit is to stop Alex Jones unless some other family becomes injured.
You have your lawyer say that in opening statements.
Sustained and, of course, opening statement is not evidence.
Nothing further.
Let me step down.
Service watch your step.
Thank you, Your Honor.
You may call your next witness.
- Can we just briefly a sidebar before we do?
- Sure, sure. - I'm very confused because my view sure. - I'm very confused because my view of the world Do we want to let Jerry go for another lunch and deal with this?
That's fine.
Does that make more sense?
I think we're making, it's slow sledding today, but we're not going to get to military challenge, I think, so we've got time to play with, and if this is going to, we've got probably more than 12 play-ups to go.
We can let the jury go, Judge.
Come back, can we come back?
We have two, we have two, just, I think we have two more play-ups today, that's it.
Can we start, Gus, and avoid this issue for the next half hour, or not?
If you're going to direct, I don't really have any objective.
Do you think that maybe makes sense?
No, I think I can address it because if I need to know what I need it now, I'll direct it because I don't think I understand what it just happened here.
so I'll come to leave in 15 minutes and then take the rest of us.
You have to lose a half hour.
How long are you going to leave?
Well, why don't you go as far as you can?
Is that right?
I will agree to whatever attorney that is as a collegial gesture.
So whatever you do.
Would you prefer to get started today?
No, I don't want to lose an hour and a half.
I don't want to lose an hour and a half.
That's what I'm trying to do.
Okay, fine.
Do you want to get started and then let me know if you need a break?
Sure.
Thank you.
All right, so we'll get started with the next witness.
And we are probably going to take a little bit of an earlier lunch today, although we will come back at two.
We're trying to be as efficient as we can.
Thank you, Your Honor.
Appreciate it.
Call Erica Laffrey with us.
All right.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
I'll say it to everybody.
Just watch your step.
I'd probably say it because I've tripped in the past.
Please remain standing with your hand.
You solemnly swear or sincerely affirm that the evidence you shall give concerning this case shall be the truth of the truth and nothing of the truth.
So I hope you got more upon the penalty of virtue.
Thank you.
You may be seated.
Then I just need you to state your name, slowly spelling your last name for the record, and the state and county you live in.
Erica Lafferty, L-A-F-F-E-R-T-Y, and Litchfield County, Connecticut.
You may inquire whenever you're ready, Attorney Maddie.
Thank you, Your Honor.
Erica, good afternoon.
You and I know each other, obviously.
We've spent a lot of time together.
Yes.
Okay.
Just trying to keep your voice up a little bit.
Okay.
And we'll go for, you know, until we get to a natural stopping point.
If you're looking for a clock in the back of the courtroom.
I know, I've looked so many times, I can't find it.
Is there one up there?
Yeah, it's above the door.
And it looks like it actually might work.
Okay.
So first, let's start by just having you tell the jury who your mom is.
My mom was the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary, Dawn Lackery-Haksprung.
She had been there since the beginning of the school year in 2010. Judge, I may have a hard time hearing the voices.
Okay, so the best you can.
Ron, would it help if we moved the microphone up?
Certainly, she gets a little closer to it.
Okay, is that better?
Okay.
So you've been sitting back there for a couple days?
Yes, I'm, yes, it was all new.
Your mom is Dawn Lafferty Hawksprong.
Yes.
All right.
And you're one of the folks who, along with these other families, have brought this case, yes?
Correct.
Erica, tell the jury a little bit about yourself, how old you are, a little bit about your family, and just kind of tell them what we'd like them to know about you.
I actually remember how old I am today.
I have a sister, Christina.
She has an amazing husband and four perfect children.
I have a fiance.
He has three children as well.
And then my grandmother who My maternal grandmother, my mom's mom, and that pretty much rounds up the family.
Okay.
And you also have some dogs?
A lot of dogs, yes.
I have four dogs, four large dogs.
Okay.
And you say you have your sister Christina.
You call her Tina.
Yes.
Okay.
And how close are you guys in age?
15 months apart.
She's 15 months older.
And are you and your sister very close?
I think that's an understatement.
Yes, we are very close.
Okay.
You said she has four kids.
Yes.
Do you have any children?
No.
Okay.
And she has three...
Three boys.
One girl.
Yeah.
How old is the youngest?
She's 10. How old did you get to see your nephews and niece?
Not much anymore.
I recently moved again, so I'm about 30 minutes away, so it's not as much as I'm used to.
I'm used to being right around the corner with kids showing up on bikes.
And that was just recently you moved?
Yes.
Tell the jury about, where did you grow up?
I grew up in Litchfield County, Woodbury specifically is where I spent most of my life.
Okay, and when you were growing up, tell us about your, who was in the house with you, what was that like growing up, your mom, your sister, and your grandma?
So as I said, I was raised by a single mom, my sister and I. My grandmother would pop in and out and help because, you know, single mom problems.
My mom and my sister I had this thing where it was just like always bully the little one and I felt like they were constantly teaming up on me and one time they watched this TV show together and they started calling me this crazy nickname, Wish.
And I had no idea why until I saw it after and realized that they had in fact been making fun of me for two years and I just didn't know.
And that was just kind of like a typical thing that they did.
Did that stick?
For a lot of years, yes.
And so this trio of you, your mom, and your sister, at least when you were young, you felt that they used to team up on you?
Yeah, I mean, they would probably tell it differently, but, you know, they...
I don't know if anybody's ever seen Gilmore Girls.
I feel like my mom was like the real life Lorelai Gilmore.
She was witty and fast-talking and sarcastic and just a very strong presence.
How old was your mom when she had your sister Tina?
I believe she was 18. She lived in Pennsylvania until she was 12 and then moved to Naugatuck.
And we were there, I believe, until 1999 and then moved to Woodbury.
So your mom, after we moved to Pennsylvania, she grew up in Naugatuck?
Yes.
Did your mom have any siblings?
My mom had one brother.
Did she go to school in Naugatuck?
She did.
Yeah, she graduated from Nagatuck High School, actually.
So when your mom had Tina at 18, and then you 15 months later, were you guys living on your own, or were you with your grandparents?
She was married to my dad for a short period of time.
And when they divorced, we moved in with my grandparents, also at Nauvatoch.
Okay.
All right.
So your mom would have been around 19, 20 at the time?
The time of the divorce was probably 22, maybe.
Did your mom have any plans to go to college?
I mean, you were very young, but obviously this is a thing, so...
Yeah.
It was a big thing.
My mom had been accepted to Penn State, which is where my grandfather went.
You know, obviously she ended up having my sister and didn't go to Penn State, so it was like this ongoing half-joke battle in the family about her choosing to not go to Penn State, and she did attend state colleges in Connecticut.
She went to Central and Southern.
Did you do that when you guys were young?
Yes.
I remember my Grandmother and grandfather having to pick us up from dance classes because my mom was in night school on top of working, on top of having two girls.
But I like vividly remember being at her college graduation when she got her undergrad.
How old would you have been at that time?
Six or seven maybe.
Okay.
What did your mom do for work before she got her undergrad?
The only, well I know in high school, she worked at McDonald's, that was her first job, and she was like very proud that she was able to memorize the entire menu, like in 20 minutes of her first shift.
An overachiever.
Oh yeah, obviously.
That passed down to my sister.
And the only other job outside of teaching that I can recall is she worked at a jewelry store.
I know it was over like the holiday period because she was an amazing gift wrapper and that like carried on and then like the whole like Christmas gift like perfection wrapping became a whole big thing in the family.
Was she in education while she was working her way through undergrad, or was that something that she started after undergrad?
I was so young.
I think the first thing I remember was her student teaching job.
Okay.
All right.
Which would have been right after college.
Yeah.
All right.
Why don't we pull up three notes of tea?
It should already be in. - It is full exhibit.
- Okay.
- Agreed.
- So obviously we see Squish in this picture.
And then who else do we see here?
My mom in the center and Tina on the right.
Do you know when Baptist might have been taken?
10-10-10, actually.
It was at my great uncle's wedding.
Oh, okay.
Yeah.
So, you said that your mom, you remember going to her graduation, she started doing her student teaching.
Did you ever talk to your mom about why she got into teaching?
I never felt the need to because I would say that anyone that spent more than five minutes with her knew that that's what she was born to do.
You know, she was always explaining and teaching and reading and she loved kids more than life itself.
So it was just a natural fit.
And once your mom finished her student teaching and started teaching, did she pursue advanced education beyond that?
She did.
She went to Southern for grad school in her sixth year and then at the time of her murder she was actually back in school.
She was at Sage University pursuing an accelerated degree for her doctorate in education.
So, okay, so she started pursuing her master's at...
At Southern.
At Southern.
And that's why you and your sister were also still young, I take it.
Yes.
Okay.
And she was also working and she was pursuing her master's at night?
With kids, yes.
Okay, that's what I was going to ask you.
It sounds like that must have been a very busy time.
Yeah, I feel like she had more hours in the day than a normal human.
Than a normal human?
Yes.
Was your mom an energetic person?
Yes, very.
Okay.
And during this time period when you and your sister growing up and your mom's putting herself through school and teaching, what types of activities would you all do together as a family?
And you specifically, like what were you involved in?
I played softball when it wasn't softball season.
I was in winter training.
I was on travel teams.
I remember her being definitely at every single game and I Would say that she probably almost never, if ever, missed a practice.
Definitely on the bleachers doing homework, but she was absolutely there and loud.
Was your mom an athlete as well?
She was.
She was at Naugusuk High School.
She was the captain of the swim team, and she also ran track.
And you told me actually a story last night about the track team.
Yes.
That was interesting and I thought you said a lot about your mom.
Can you tell the jury that?
Yeah, I feel like this really speaks to her personality continuing through her entire life.
As I said, she moved to Naughtuck when she was 12 and she wanted to run track in high school.
So she just signed up for tryouts, but at that time, Naugatuck High School did not have a girls track team, so she was like, okay, I'll try out for boys track.
And the track coach, I don't know, I know he was also my gym teacher at one point, so I'm not sure, I believe he was the coach there, wasn't a fan of that idea, and my mom and my grandfather actually, like, Petitioned the state or whatever needed to happen to start a girls track team so that my mom was then able to run girls track.
So she started the girls, because of her, the girls track team started in Haagataka.
Yes, yes.
And the girls still run track in Haagataka.
Absolutely.
So your mom sounds like a tough lady.
Yes.
Was that true around the house as well?
Yes.
What can you tell us about that?
She was very...
She didn't yell much.
There wasn't many times that I can remember her raising her voice, but she would talk to you in this very low principle tone.
It's like the lower her voice got, the more trouble you were in.
So it wasn't a very loud house on her account.
Tina and I were a bit of a different situation.
But she was firm.
She wanted us to have good grades and be good athletes and just be focused on what we commit to.
That was very important to her for us to follow through.
And it wasn't just with us.
She was firm with friends as well.
Your friends?
Yes.
Yes.
Like a friend swore at my house.
I remember one time she grounded him from my house and we had this big porch and he would have to sit on the curb across the street as his punishment.
She grounded somebody else's?
Yes.
Someone else's child.
You mentioned that she was a principal.
She started as a teacher.
Yes.
Okay.
And at some point she went into administration?
Yeah.
I don't think it was entirely by choice.
I know she didn't like it.
Her heart was in the classroom.
Her heart was with kids, always.
But she was a single mom on a teacher's salary, which Wasn't working out well, so then she, you know, ultimately made the decision to go into administration and wasn't a fan.
Well, where was her, if you remember, like, where was her first job as a principal?
She was the assistant principal at First Rogers Park in Danbury, which is a middle school there, and then Danbury High School.
And she was the assistant principal at Danbury?
What job as head principal?
Her first job as head principal was Region 14. She started off at Bethlehem Elementary and then there was a reconfiguration in the district and she was moved to the elementary school in Woodbury, which is Mitchell Elementary.
Okay.
And then in 2010, she was hired at Sandy Hook Elementary School?
She was.
As a principal?
Yes.
Was she excited about that?
She was.
There was, as I mentioned, the reconfiguration of the school district that she had been in prior.
There was a lot of internal things that she just wasn't a fan of.
So when she was able to move to the Sandy Hook District, she was absolutely elated.
I think she actually used Dream Job at one point.
And that was in 2010. 2010. Your Honor, how about now?
Is that okay?
I think that's a fine idea.
So we will let the jury go for a little bit of a longer lunch.
We'll stay on the record and deal with some legal issues.
Ron will collect your notebooks.
I just want you to be very careful if you are going out and enjoying the nice weather while we have this nice weather that you make sure when you are near the courthouse that you avoid any of the You certainly don't want to see or hear anything that you shouldn't see or hear,
and I did neglect to mention this morning that I have not received any notes from Mr. Ferraro, so I'll mention that now, but I will extend this invitation as often as I can remember in the morning.
Please make sure that if you observe any juror of conduct that you think is a problem or you personally We're unable to avoid any media coverage or media or anything along those lines that you follow the procedure that we laid out by giving Mr. Forer a written note so that I can dress it on the record.
Alright?
Having said that, I hope everyone has a wonderful lunch and we will see you all Alright,
so do we want to address what we need to address now?
I'd like to, Your Honor.
It's okay.
So, at Sidebar, I asked the Sidebar because I was confused by the cross-examination of Mr. Wheeler.
Because it seemed to me that when he was asked direct questions about whether he was aware of Alex Jones' I don't recall whether there was an objection,
but maybe if it's an objectionable question, because I thought it was a little confusing, too, whether it wasn't clear personal views that he might hold versus what he says on his show as his stated views.
So is that what you're-- You know, that is a distinction that was happening.
But the way I was interpreting the testimony, initially, it was like he was just saying, I don't know what his views are on that.
And I expect that many of our plaintiffs are going to say that, because it's true, despite the chuckle.
And I think that if for Attorney Patis to then say to them anyway, okay, you don't know what Mr. Jones' views are on guns, but didn't you speak to Congress?
And the reason I'm raising Any way that the jury could infer any sort of bias based on Mr. Jones' gun views and therefore exaggerate their damages is if they know what his views are.
What's the testimony?
Can I just interrupt you for a second?
Attorney Pat, is there any way that you're willing to ask your question along the lines of, What they understood what he said on his show about guns.
And that might, you know, because what he said on his show may not actually reflect what he personally believes.
If that's a distinction that matters to the court finitely, it's a distinction without difference in general.
But to address Attorney Maddie's point, it's for the jury to determine just how credible that was.
If a reasonable person could look at that video and not know, even now, and say, "I don't know, I can't infer." I disagree with you, Attorney Pat, because I think that it is sort of confusing.
You know, there's what he says on his show versus what his views are.
And we don't know if what he says on his show are really his true personal views.
And I think that's where the confusion lies.
And I understand what your inquiry is.
I just think that it would avoid the problem if The testimony was elicited, you know, what they understood that he said his views were.
I hear what you're saying, but I hear Attorney Maddie saying more.
I hear Attorney Maddie saying that given the testimony, there was no right to make the inquiry as to his views versus what he stated because the witness claimed he had no views as to Alex's utterances as to guns and what they meant, whether they were his first views Well, I think that is for the jury.
I think that is for the jury to decide.
They see the video and whether they accept or reject the testimony, that's going to be up to the jury.
Fair enough.
If he impeaches, so now we're talking about impeachment on the issue of, do you know what his views are?
Okay?
But, I'm trying to ask this stuff with the answer as to whether they know what his views are.
He can impeach him on it.
Oh, that's not credible.
You must know what his views are.
You've been aware of him for all these years.
You're saying that's appropriate?
Fine.
But, if they've said, I don't know what his views are.
He does not then have a basis to say, and that you've done this and this and this in gun activism, because there's no basis for the jury at this point to say, he must be biased against Mr. Jones because it's gun use, when the testimony is, I don't know what his views are.
Well, that's the testimony, but there's also testimony that the witness saw the video.
So, I understand what you're saying.
Is there anything we can do to avoid this problem with each witness?
What I do want to avoid, I don't, you know...
Let me talk to Attorney Manny.
I think Attorney Manny and I may be closer to agreeing than you perceive.
That's not a criticism of the court.
All right.
It would be nice to work the kinks out so that we don't have to do this every time.
But the other thing is, I want to – I allowed the questions on, you know, the positions on gun control.
I don't think that we need to talk about the Second Amendment, the First Amendment.
I want to steer – this is a hearing of damages.
I don't want to hear about the Second Amendment, First Amendment, presidents, elections.
I played the video, which was the plaintiff's exhibit, which is I assume what you're referring to is Mr. Pattis' last question.
Where you basically said, and now you're trying to stop Alex Jones, which is exactly what he said in his opening, which is exactly the new warning bell.
No, it's exactly what they said in the opening.
Well, I don't listen.
The opening is not evidence.
I'm not going to say it again.
Take it and put it out of your mind, and I'm going to rule on the issues in the case based on the evidence that is permissible.
So what was said during the openings that was objected to, not objected to, It doesn't matter.
I didn't intend to bring that up, but when Attorney Koskoff stood up and said, you testified to stop this from happening again, that was an exact parallel.
And I think in terms of his bias as to testifying today, it was fair game.
I just don't, it's quite clear, and look, Attorney Pettis is an advocate, and I get it, but it is quite clear that what Attorney Pettis wants the jury to believe is that this is an effort to silence Alex Jones, silence an It
went into the presentation of the evidence by the plaintiffs.
And they selected their exhibits knowing they'd have to live with the consequences of what they offer.
When I argue within the four quarters of an exhibit that's been presented in this courtroom, how does it become irrelevant?
It becomes irrelevant, and is it because it hurts?
It becomes irrelevant in the same way that the plaintiffs were saying?
No, Attorney Pat, that's enough.
But here's what I'm going to tell you.
Don't talk over me.
Again.
There is reference to Trump in these exhibits, as I recall.
Megyn Kelly, are there references to Clinton?
Presidential elections, Second Amendment, doesn't matter, all right?
I'm ruling the way that I'm ruling, and so I don't want to hear about presidents, presidential elections, Second Amendment.
You want to question them about their views on guns, do it in a way that you're not inflammatory about it.
I understand that the record reflects it.
we don't need to do it every time but that's that's how it's going to be like it or not right anything further all right so we'll start back at 2 p.m Good to see everybody.
I'll be able to take all your questions here, but there's been a big national news story that broke last night concerning the bankruptcy of Free Speech Systems Apparent Company of InfoWars.com.
So here's the official statement.
The bankruptcy court entered an order that removed two professional firms for reasons involving the earlier Chapter 11 case and their firm's prior non-disclosures.
Importantly, The free speech system is in control of its case and has been working closely with the Subchapter 5 trustee and its counsel.
The bankruptcy court had no criticism of any of free speech activities and, in fact, retained our lead lawyer To now lead the case.
Free speech will actively and quickly retain replacement professionals, this time with the guidelines of the Chubb Subchapter 5 trustee.
Again, this time with the guidelines of the Subchapter 5 trustee and lessons learned.
The court's ruling opens up free speech to become a better, leaner and more responsive operation, free from the issues and problems noted by the court with their prior professionals.
And I think Judge Lopez in Texas has been very fair and been doing a great job.
The media spun some changes in our bankruptcy procedures as some big, huge, evil, bad thing.
It wasn't.
We invited the Chapter 5 bankruptcy trustee in.
In fact, demanded.
They come see our books, see the whole operation, and find out the truth.
And so, I guess that's precipitated them coming in and looking at things and talking to the court.
So, that said, that's a big issue to get out of the way.
I wanted to make one more statement, and then I should take any of your questions here.
And it's this.
I have apologized for six years For anything that I did wrong questioning Sandy Hook.
I didn't question Sandy Hook to be mean.
I wasn't the leader of questioning Sandy Hook.
But I did say things that were hurtful and not true.
But I did not do it on purpose.
I apologized four years ago on Joe Rogan.
It's got over 100 million views.
For 30 minutes.
Four years ago.
But the corporate media constantly says that, oh, for the first time he apologizes.
I apologized on Steven Crowder three years ago.
Six years ago, I said, I believe Sandy Hook happened.
When I became extremely famous during the Trump campaign, Hillary Clinton ran $30 million of national ads saying I was Trump's brain.
Look, I like President Trump overall, but I wasn't his brain.
He doesn't listen to anybody but himself.
Them Democrats believed that I actually run the Republican Party.
I don't.
And they believe that I'm like this Lex Luthor mastermind that controls everything.
I don't.
I basically don't even control my own life.
And so I'm just simply here to say I'm not the Sandy Hook man.
I've already said I was sorry years and years ago.
I've already tried to make restitution.
We gave the court all the discovery.
They defaulted us because they found there wasn't any evidence of premeditated master plans with Sandy Hook and all this garbage.
That's not true.
I've taken responsibility for mistakes I've made.
We have about a 95% accuracy rate on so many other subjects.
I do question a lot of things.
I'm more careful these days.
Jussie Smollett, I was the first to go on air and say I thought Jussie Smollett was faking a fraud.
I knew I could be sued, but it just didn't sound right.
So I said, I think it's a fraud.
And as an American, I have a right.
I have a right to question something.
Now, if that becomes hurtful of individuals and causes them pain, that is certainly a problem.
And I have admitted to that.
So that's where we stand.
They are using this case to go after the First Amendment.
Sandy Hook has been used to go after the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms.
Now it's being used to go after the First Amendment.
And that's terrible.
I don't want to be the person for mistakes I've had to be used to get rid of the First Amendment.
I'll answer your question in a second.
The whole issue here Is that there has been basically a lynch mob to get Alex Jones since Trump got elected.
They looked at everything I've done and decided Sandy Hook was one of the biggest mistakes I made.
Nobody's perfect.
And they blew up what I said and did, twisted it, took it out of context, and then said that I'm famous and successful because of Sandy Hook.
Sandy Hook was 23 minutes, is there evidence in there, 23 minutes of what they think is bad in 10 years.
23 minutes.
Now, I said some things that weren't right and hurtful, and I'm sorry for that, and I apologize for the 500th time.
But that said, these lawyers have misrepresented what I said and did, and they've misrepresented everything that I stand for.
And that's why I'm here today, and I appreciate you all coming out.
Now I'm ready to take your questions.
On that point, Alex, on that point about the big picture, do you think that this proceeding here can, quote, take you down?
You know, do you think this will stop?
That's a great question.
That's a great statement, quite frankly.
In the Texas trial, where they say I've been found liable for $50-something million, it's actually $5 million under Texas caps, but again, the media keeps reporting fake news.
They said, we want to take Alex Jones out.
We want to silence him.
We want to take away his megaphone.
We want him to never have his platform again.
This isn't about restitution to families.
This isn't about any of that.
It's about setting a precedent to annihilate free speech.
And in their opening statements, Last week, these lawyers, who already won $73 million from Remington for many of these same clients, They said, we want to stop and shut down Alex Jones.
So their whole mission is to shut me down.
Silence an American.
If the jury says I'm bad and wants to give them all this money that doesn't exist, that's one thing.
But don't sit there in the corporate media and act like this is about restitution for families.
I'm being used to set a precedent, just like I was with deplatforming four years ago, to censor and shut everybody down, and this is un-American.
If we don't like free speech, we should move to Russia or Communist China.
This guy had the next one.
What is it?
Who else has questioned Sandy Hook?
Dr. Steve Pacinic was the former head of CIA psychological warfare operations, Tom Clancy's co-writer, and I really respected him.
In the first few years, I didn't think Sandy Hook was fake.
I thought it might have had some other people that let Lanza attack.
But he said no from his connections.
He gave me a lot of good information over the years.
Steve Pacinic said no, Alex.
The professor out of Florida and the school safety individual, Halbig, and another professor out of Minnesota, they had said it was staged, and he said yes, he believed it was.
So off what Pacinic said a few times on air having debates, I said, yeah, I think this could be staged.
But you said it before they did, right?
No, no, I never did.
I just asked your question.
It's on record.
Okay, well, that's not what's being shown here.
I appreciate it.
How are you going to convince the judge that you're telling the truth?
You said the judge don't want you there because you're lying.
How are you going to convince the judge you're telling the truth or the jury?
I don't understand your question.
Okay, sir, go ahead.
You're on the verge of testifying here.
What did you learn in the Austin trial?
Well, again, this wasn't a trial.
Again, people think you're so stupid.
They think I'm so stupid.
We've checked all the legal files.
We've checked the whole history of this.
There's things being done in the Texas cases, or two of them, and in the Connecticut case, that have never been done before.
A default is when somebody is in a lawsuit and they run to another country and don't defend it.
Then they still have a two-week or three-week hearing on was there really damages and how much money do they have.
It's all about money.
Instead, when we gave them all, you see all my emails, text messages, everything's in We gave them the discovery, years of it.
And they kept threatening to default us if we didn't give them more, more, more.
So we gave them, we went through millions of emails, all our text messages, gave them everything.
And when they didn't find a case of this being some premeditated lie, it was just, I'm a talk radio show on TV. I'm also on talk radio.
When, I mean, every day I just go read articles and talk about whatever I want on air.
When they saw that there was not Anything in their discovery, they went, okay, you're secretly hiding stuff.
We find you guilty.
And the judge issued an order here, which has never been issued before in the United States, saying you will not say you're innocent, you will not say that you did not profit from Sandy Hook, you will not say that you complied with discovery, and you will not say the judge or the opposing lawyers are engaged in bad behavior.
I could be somebody On trial, found with 20 dead bodies in my basement, and if I want to get up and say I'm innocent, and if I want to get up and say the judge is wrong, I have a right as an American in a criminal or civil trial.
This judge is saying she'll hold me in contempt if I say I'm innocent.
But I'm not going to perjure myself and say that I premeditatedly engineered the whole Sandy Hook questioning thing when I'm on record.
I didn't.
I'm not going to say I profited from Sandy Hook.
From day one, it hurt us, but I never think about what I cover, how it does for us, or how it doesn't.
And so you can't have a judge telling you to say that you're guilty when you're not.
That is insane.
Just because she found me in default and now it's just about damages, you can't then tell a person that's under attack that they then don't have their free speech.
And so that's why they've been waiting to have me call.
They said they called me last week.
Then they waited.
They said they called me yesterday.
Then they waited.
They said they'd call me today.
And then they waited.
Because they don't know what to do when I go in there and call their bluff and say, I will not perjure myself.
I didn't premeditatedly question Sandy Hook.
I question everything.
So that's the reality.
That's the reality.
All right, go ahead.
Yes, ma'am.
Sir, thank you.
I apologize for acknowledging you today.
What do you have to tell?
...followers who still believe that this became the list of live stream yesterday, and still believe the common point that... ...is a little covering how it is.
Sure, sure.
They've had a counter-terrorism individual from the government in there.
They've had a Pentagon psychological warfare expert in there claiming, I'm Lex Luthor, when that's the job they actually did for the government was disinformation overseas, on record.
So you have real people with degrees from the Pentagon in disinfo claiming, I am like You know, the Mike Tyson of disinformation.
It's absolutely ridiculous.
I go print a bunch of articles off every day, play video clips on a talk show like Howard Stern, and give my opinions.
So ma'am, to answer your question, what was the question again?
Oh yeah, I heard it, I heard it.
Oh yeah, oh yeah, let me raise this point.
I saw the articles everywhere.
Oh, YouTube's biggest law channel with millions of viewers of the Alex Jones-Sandy Hook trial in Connecticut suspends comments because of threats or whatever.
We don't support threats against people, but that's not the reason they took it down.
90% of the comments were pro-Alex Jones, and the majority of comments didn't believe Sandy Hook happened.
That's not because of me.
They had a psychological warfare expert up there say 450 million people.
That's all of the English-speaking world.
Heard me and don't believe Sandy Hook happened.
That's BS, folks.
There aren't 450 million people that don't think that Sandy Hook didn't happen.
Okay, so they put a guy up there to make up some number and then claim that I convinced people to believe Sandy Hook didn't happen.
Lying about WMDs is why people don't believe anything.
Jesse Smollett lying.
The Gulf of Tonkin, all the other hoaxes, all the other scams.
Government and corporations have engaged in so many scams, so many fake staged events, that people don't believe the government or the corporate media.
You've lost the public.
The public The public don't believe in you anymore.
The public don't buy the mainstream media anymore, and that's why they hate you.
I mean, the New York Times lied about WMDs on purpose.
The New York Times lied about WMDs that came out in Senate reports on purpose to launch a war, and then they sit in judgment of me that questioned a mass shooting like I'm a bad person.
It's absolutely outrageous.
Go ahead, ma'am.
Go ahead.
Do you think you're the victim or do you think the families are the victim?
I think that the families are a victim of the process of these lawyers manipulating them and controlling them to go after the Second Amendment and the First Amendment.
And I also think that in the process, I have been used as a straw man to build an image of Alex Jones that isn't really accurate.
I've come here, and for six years said I believe it happened, and apologized if I caused pain.
But the truth is, I didn't create the story, and I didn't create the distrust of the system that led in cause of this.
So I, here's a great example of the Texas case.
I'm watching a wonderful, beautiful lady.
Man, I've been reading her stuff now.
She's so impressive.
I want to support what she's doing with youth.
Scarlett Lewis.
I didn't even know who she was.
Never said her name when I questioned Sandy Hook.
And that was a snake.
I should have gone and researched it and humanized it.
And she's up there beautifully saying about how she forgives Adam Lanza, the guy that killed her son, and how she saw him go up to heaven with all of this stuff.
and then she turns to me and says this morning you said I'm fake and this grandmother was living in Waterbury and In 2011, she retired and moved up to family property in the Adirondacks.
So my mom was also helping to, like, kind of rehab her house, or my grandma's house, build her own house.
So we were up there a ton.
Was the idea that your grandma was going to retire up there and your mom would have a place right near her?
Literally right next door.
Yeah, my grandmother broke off a piece of her land and gave it to my mom to build a house big enough to house our large family.
Did you say that you went to high school at Woodbury in Woodbury?
Yes, I transferred from Naugatuck High School to Nanawag.
To where?
Nanawag in Woodbury.
Nanawag, okay.
Um, and then after Nangwa, did you pursue any, uh, post-secondary education?
I went to Nangwa Valley, graduated, uh, with an associate's in legal studies, um, but my primary focus was always work.
Okay.
Um, and in 2010 now, this is when your mom took the job at Sandy Hook, were you, were you and she living together?
She called me her basement dweller because I was 27 and still kind of in and out.
Like, oh, I'm going to go live with a friend, but I miss my mommy and I want to come back home.
So I had a bedroom in her house from birth to the time I was 27. Okay.
2012, yeah.
I officially told her, okay, you can eliminate my bedroom in the end of July right before the shooting.
Okay, so July 2012, you finally moved out.
At 27, yes, I'm going to own that.
I take it though that even though you moved out, I mean, you can't fully, I guess my wife would say cut those apron strings.
Yeah.
So did you continue to kind of see your mom a lot?
I was up, I mean, at that point she was spending At least every Saturday, Sunday.
Sometimes she would go up on Friday after work, take a Friday off and take a long weekend because the house was, her house was, you know, in the final stages of being built.
So I was with her every single weekend.
Usually saw her at my sister's house at least once a week or I would be driving to her house like, hey, can you feed me?
I can't cook.
I mean, I think she had a love-hate relationship with it.
But yeah, sometimes she would kick me out and send me to my sister's, like, let her feed you.
She's doing the things anyway.
Okay.
And so coming up on the 2012 school year, were you and your mom discussing what she was hoping for out of that 2012 school year at St. Joe?
Back to school was her favorite time of year.
She was always excited to meet the kindergarten class.
She was excited to watch teachers set up their classrooms.
She was excited to reorganize her office, even though she never really made any major changes, but New Pens excited her because that's just the kind of person that she was.
But in the 2012-13 school year, she was actually planning a trip to China.
My understanding is that it was some kind of teaching exchange situation that some of the teachers in Newtown were going to participate in.
And as soon as she heard about it, she was like, yes, I am so in for this trip to China.
Did you become aware that At the beginning of that school year, your mom decided to start a Twitter account related to San Diego Colon issues?
She did.
She did.
She was very active on Twitter, for sure.
By the way, is that Twitter account still public and available?
It is, yes.
Why don't we pull some of that up.
Let's start with exhibit, I think these are in 440 through 445.
They're in.
Yes, they're 445.
And I also have 447 through 450.
Yes.
Agreed.
When we start at 440, we have it.
And we can pull it up and see if everybody can see.
here.
Okay, so Erica, this looks like a Twitter post, tweet, I guess, from your mom's account on September 24th, 2012. What are we seeing here?
That's like the courtyard at the Sandy Hook School.
Is that parents?
Parents ensuring another great learning...
You might have it right in front of you if it's easier, so you don't have to...
Yeah.
Parents ensuring another great learning space at Sandy Hook.
Do they have the parents coming too?
I don't know.
That's kind of cool.
Yeah, that's the courtyard.
Is this the kind of thing that your mom would tweet out to kind of let the community know what was happening?
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Okay.
Let's go to 441. I think that you'd spent a fair amount of time at the school itself visiting your mom, yeah?
All of her schools always, yes.
Okay.
So let's pull this one up.
Okay, so the date on this one, Erica, is October 17th, 2012, so maybe three weeks later.
Safety first at Sandy Hook.
It's a beautiful day for our annual evacuation drill.
See that?
Yeah.
I'm reading it in her little sing-song voice.
In your mom's voice, as if she was saying it.
So this is just a fire drill, right?
Yep.
Let's go to the next one.
Let's go to, I guess, 442. Okay, October 18th, next day, Sandy Hook and Education Connection celebrate fall.
Do you know what this is about?
I don't.
Okay.
Oh, it's like the cafeteria, maybe?
Kids getting together in the cafeteria?
It does, yeah.
Yeah, I recognize some of the teachers.
Okay, let's go to the next one.
November 12, 2012, Sandy Hook says thank you at our annual Veterans Day breakfast.
Do you remember talking to your mom about this?
I remember that morning she was not happy that she had to eat two breakfasts because her husband always wanted to have breakfast with her and she was like, no, I have one at school.
So it was like a big thing.
So she had to like pretend to eat a little bit at home so that she can have the good stuff at the Veterans Day breakfast.
Okay.
And just for the record, that's Exhibit 444. Yes, thank you.
And let's advance to 445, please.
I'm going to show you this one.
November 14th, Sandy Hook's staff raises money for Adopt-A-Family.
Do you remember this?
Yes.
I want to direct your attention to the young woman in the center here.
Do you recognize who that is?
I do.
That's Victoria Soto.
In the brown sweater there?
Yes.
And Ms. Soto's family are among the families that have brought this case as well, right?
Correct.
And Ms. Soto was murdered at San Diego School.
She was.
Okay.
Why don't we go to 4:47?
Okay, this is November 16th.
The Sandy Hook Book Ferry reads with first-graders, keeping books in our hearts and our minds.
This first-grader is willing to read with a fairy princess.
It is the book fairy.
Is that also in the courtyard that we saw earlier?
It is.
Go to 448. More first graders.
San Diego first graders learn about the three A's of concert behavior, attention, appreciation, and applause.
Is that right?
Yes.
Kids are getting ready for the holiday concert?
Yes.
Let's go to the next one.
449. And here we are at the concert.
Sandy Hook students enjoy the rehearsal for our fourth grade winter concert, a talented group led by Mary Rose Krzysztofek.
Yeah?
Yes.
Do you remember this concert, your mom talking about it, or did you go?
I remember that she She borrowed a red scarf from the librarian to wear with a gold sweater dress that she lost the belt for and she wanted something to accent her sweater dress.
So she borrowed a red scarf from the librarian which she then returned the morning of December 14th.
And this is just, this is two days before?
Yes.
Let's go to the next photo.
This will be 4.50.
This is December 13, 2012. Setting up for the Sandy Hook nonfiction book preview for staff.
Common Core, here we come.
I see you smiling there.
Is that because your mom was talking about Common Core?
A lot.
Yeah, she had a love-hate relationship with changing math.
There were some curriculum changes that were kind of happening around this time.
Yes, yes.
And she was trying to be excited about it for her staff, but was having some personal struggles with the concept of it.
And she had a kid who was horrible with math.
And your mom's Twitter account, which is Don Huxbrunn, that's just her name, right?
Part of it.
And that was...
Oh, because you refer to her as Don Lafferty Huxbrunn.
Her legal name was Don Lafferty Huxbrunn.
Okay.
These pictures were up for everybody to see, all following right up until the day of the shooting, right?
They're still available.
They're still there?
Correct.
Every day?
Yes.
This was just a regular school, right?
Yes.
Kids coming every day?
Yes.
It was open.
Was it open?
It was absolutely open.
I was there and helped decorate.
Was it a toxic waste dump?
Not by any means.
In fact, did you know who the school custodian was?
Both of them, yes.
What were their names?
Kevin Anzalotti was the lead custodian, and then Rick, whose last name I can't recall.
But they took great pride in the school and were there in minutes, within absolute minutes, with any request that my mom had, or probably any teacher.
Did your mom love those guys?
More than anything.
Jury's heard video of Alex Jones calling this school a cutout.
Stage.
Was it a stage?
No, it was an elementary school.
Erica, I'm not going I'm not going to ask you about
I'm not going to ask you to go into the morning of December 14, 2012, reading that day.
Okay.
You were here for Bill Alderman's testimony, yes?
Yes.
Carly Soto's testimony?
Yes.
It was the worst day of your life, wasn't it?
Without a doubt.
At some point, did you learn about Your mom's last moments?
I did.
She was shot and killed, confronting the gunman.
Doing that from investigators?
Yes.
Did you learn anything about, before that terrible moment, whether your mom had interacted with Vicki Soto earlier that one?
It's going to be your state judge.
I'm offering it to show the impact on Ms. Lafferty and the impact of Mr. Jones's subsequent denials of her mother's existence.
That morning, I was told by Some of the faculty members that Vicki had come into the office later than usual, but by any normal standards on time, but just not on time for who Vicki and Dawn were.
And she had spilled coffee on her sweater.
And my mom was, of course, laughing at her because that's what Dawn did and helped her to, you know, clean the coffee off of her sweater because I think there were parents that were supposed to be going into Vicki's classroom that day.
And she was obviously embarrassed that she hadn't spilled coffee on herself, so my mom was helping to remedy that situation.
The fact that your mom was killed confronting the gun as he entered the school...
Has it become important to you in your memory and your understanding of who your mother was?
It's probably one of the most important things I know about her.
Has that been a source of pride for you, even as you grieve the loss of your mother?
Absolutely.
I was very angry for a while because I was told that she had identified noises that she heard to be gunshots and decided to go out into the hallway anyway.
But I can feel nothing but pride about that now.
Because it's just who she was.
She would have done anything, did do everything in her power to protect her staff and most importantly her students.
she acted no differently as she would if it was my sister and I in that school.
Mark, I want you to, in the days of the news after the shooting, I want to focus you now on why we're I want to focus you now on why we're here.
Did it come to a point where you started to realize that something was happening?
That is, that there were people who were claiming Yes.
I don't recall specifically when, but within weeks I know that I was being tagged on Facebook and Twitter.
I was getting direct messages on Facebook and Twitter.
Sometimes it was my friends, like, saying, you know, here's this article that's saying Sandy Hook is fake, and they were like, no, this is her daughter, and they would tag me in it, or it would be a message on Twitter just telling me that I'm part of a conspiracy, and it was very frequent and very, very, very early on. - Let me ask you, 'cause you said that you would, somebody would tag you.
I think Carly may have talked about this a little bit, but what is that, how would you know somebody had tagged you?
How does that work?
I think now you just type the person's name and it gives you an option of your friends that you can select.
And the majority of the time it was on a news article.
So go back up a second.
How do you find out that somebody has tagged you?
Do you get an alert?
It gives a notification on my phone.
So you had a Facebook account yourself.
Correct.
And Facebook would alert you that somebody had tagged you.
Correct.
Meaning that they had kind of put your name next to another piece of content.
Yes.
And then that when you were tagging these things is when you were starting to see this stuff saying it was fake.
Yeah, hoax, a conspiracy, actors.
And you said that your friends would-- what would your friends be doing?
I think they were trying to help by just saying, like, this wasn't fake.
Like, Erica Lafferty, this is her daughter.
And they would basically insert me into the conversation, or the comment section.
So, like, what's your reactions when you're seeing this?
I mean, have you ever heard anything like this before?
Absolutely not.
So when you're seeing this, you've just lost your mom, what's going through your head about how to deal with this?
How to deal with it?
I couldn't process the idea of it in general, so having to deal with it wasn't a thought.
Explain to the jury that followed you.
So you were on Facebook and you were on Twitter.
Yes.
Did you have an email account as well?
Yes.
So you said this started within a matter of weeks?
Correct.
Just explain to the jury, once this stuff started, how much was it?
What's the volume we're talking about?
Daily, for sure.
Multiple times daily, as time went on.
Over time, I wouldn't even know where to begin to estimate a number.
You mentioned that at the outset, it was stuff like, this is fake, you're an actress, it's a hoax.
Describe to the jury other types.
When it first started, was that the general type of stuff you were getting?
Yes, it was pretty generic at the beginning.
And then as time went on, it got more specific and a lot more scary.
You know, things would be mailed to my house.
There were, you know, threats of rape and...
Wait, wait, wait.
You were receiving threats from people saying they were going to rape you?
Correct.
Is this online?
Yes.
Was this kind of thing, like, frequent?
That type of graphic violent?
Not as frequent as the hoax and conspiracy and actress situation, but the letters to my house, the random death or rape threats would come in.
Attempted to report it to the police department in the town that I lived in and I was just told that it wasn't specific enough or they couldn't track it or, you know, the post had been deleted or taken down or the account was deleted and there was just no way possible to keep up or do anything.
So just to orient the jury to the time frame, are we talking about this is like within the Did there come a time when you learned of a gentleman named Alex Jones?
Yes.
It was either the end of March or early April of 2013. Remember where you were when that happened?
Yes, I was at a restaurant with a colleague.
I was tagged on a video on Facebook.
I opened it.
My phone automatically played the videos when I opened Facebook.
And I don't recall exactly what video it was, but it was just saying that Sandy Hook was fake.
And the most Loud and aggressive voice was just booming out of my phone, and I shut it down within seconds and was like, I can't.
I just, like, I'm with colleagues.
I can't do this right now.
Alex Jones' voice just started booming out of your phone.
I didn't know it to be Alex Jones at the time.
I did see Infowars.com on the video.
I then learned that it was Alex Jones.
At that point did you do anything?
After you pulled this video up on your phone, you said you didn't know who it was at the time, right?
Correct.
Yeah, in the couple of seconds that I watched the video, I did not know it to be Alex Jones at that time.
As far as you know, had you heard his name before?
Never, no.
But you did see the Infowars.com thing associated with the video?
Yes, and I took a screenshot of that because I was like, I'll deal with it later.
And did you try to deal with it later?
I went to Infowars.com either later that night or then at the following morning.
And the first thing that I saw was something about a Sandy Hook...
I don't know if it was actors or conspiracy or hoax or what the words were.
And I was just like, I... It was just too much.
It was just too much, and I wasn't in a place where I could deal with that.
You just X'd out a bit.
Yeah.
You talked about receiving the letters of your heart.
Yes.
What were these letters about?
Projection Foundation hearsay.
Did you read them?
I don't recall the specifics, but yes, I did read them.
Um, the only thing I remember.
These are being offered if Ms. Lafferty reviewed them.
I'm sorry.
Thank you.
The only specific thing that I remember was the common theme of the return address that was Agar 15 and 15 was spelled incorrectly.
And it was mailed from I don't know what town in California.
So you were getting repeated letters from this supposed return address?
I would assume that it was the same person based on the fact that 15 was consistently spelled incorrectly.
And were these letters more of the same?
Actress, hoax, Sandy Hook didn't happen?
Yes, that I should die and then be buried next to my fake dead mother.
However that's possible.
These letters actually said that?
Yes, fake dead mother.
After, well...
During the 2013 timeframe, did your sister Tina decide that she wanted to start a charity in your mother's name?
I think that it may have been earlier than that, but it was very shortly after the shooting.
She started the Dawn Laffrey-Hoxprung Memorial Fund.
And what was her idea on that?
A way to honor my mom.
The promise of the foundation is to, we've raised, we've done a ton of fundraisers and raised money and we give a scholarship away each year to a Naugatuck High School student, because that's where my mom went, who is looking to pursue a career in education.
Someone who has John-like qualities.
Are you guys still doing that?
Giving out scholarships every year?
Every year.
And when Tina first started this, I think there was a Facebook page that people could go to to learn about the charity.
Correct.
I started, I don't remember how specifically, but I started a page on Facebook, the Dawn Lafferty-Huxford Memorial Fund, and it gave a little write-up of who my mom was and why we were raising the money, who the money would go to, and a little bit about the Dawn-like qualities of, you know, the students who would be eligible to receive the scholarship award.
What happened to that Facebook page?
It was up for a couple of months because there were An influx of comments on every post and an influx of messages that would come into it telling me that I am lying, I'm, you know, raising money off of a scam, like I'm scamming people out of money.
My mom never existed, Sandy Hook never happened, and it was just too much for me to try to deal with, and I had to take the page down. - Do you have a try, Erica, to, you know, a lot of this is happening online, Did you ever try to engage with any of these people who were coming after you?
I did.
Many times.
And for 27 years of my life, that woman was my best friend. that woman was my best friend.
And for people to tell me that she didn't exist?
You just let that happen.
And I would engage with them.
I would send them pictures.
And then the volume was just so great that I couldn't keep up with it.
It was just swallowing me whole.
Pictures when, you know, me and her when I was little or her holding one of my sister's kids when they were born or a picture of my mom and my sister at my sister's wedding.
I didn't get to have one of those.
You said at some point you just stopped crying.
Mm-hmm.
Yes.
There was too many of them and only one of me.
These letters you got and the online threats you got, what did that cause you to fear for your own safety?
Did you worry about how these people got your address?
What did you do about all that?
I installed home security systems.
I got more dogs.
I stopped really going out around town.
I didn't really go to grocery stores.
I would have groceries delivered.
Amazon became my best friend so that I didn't have to go to like a Target or something.
Do you still live this way?
Yes.
Have you been confronted in person by people who claim that you're an actress and that your mother never lived?
Yes.
Starting just a couple of weeks after the shooting.
Here in Connecticut?
Correct.
In my hometown.
Woodbury?
Yes.
I would agree about that.
I was on my way to a birthday party.
I think it was early 2014. I was at a gas station and...
This is a different one, not right after.
This is...
Yeah, I'm sorry.
Yeah, I'm flustered.
This is just after the two-year anniversary.
I was on my way to a birthday party and I was at a gas station and somebody just walked out and pointed.
And was like, you're part of that Sandy Hook hoax.
Yeah, I think it was that Sandy Hook hoax.
There was another time in a grocery store where I walked by and somebody would just say on the side of the go, crisis actress, how do you feel comfortable going out in public when places that you know and trust and have been going for years You never know who's going to say what.
Like, how do you trust anything?
How do you trust your safety?
How do you trust your security?
How do you know that this isn't one of the people who's sending a threat to your house or a threat to my Twitter account?
How many times have you moved since the shooting?
I've lived in Six different places and it's been five moves.
Why?
Mostly so that people don't know where I am.
Because you're already a finding?
Yes.
What other steps have you taken to protect your identity?
Um...
When I Travel, primarily for work, I'll use an alias if I have to order an Uber or some sort of car service.
use a different name when I check into hotels.
You testified that one of the reasons at least for a time you tried to engage these people I'm paraphrasing, but what I understood you'd be saying is that you didn't want this idea that your mother didn't exist to be uncontested.
Correct.
Did you have concerns about what your nephews and niece might see as they grew older about their grandma?
Very much.
I think we can...
It's safe to say that we're living in a world where...
Information is widely available online and my sister has four kids.
Her youngest was only six months old when my mom was killed.
There's going to come a time where Allison's going to want to know about grandma outside of the stories we tell her.
I wanted to make sure I was at least taking steps to make sure the first thing that came up when she googled her grandmother's name wasn't that she never existed.
Because those kids deserve better than that.
Is this still happening to you?
Yes.
Your mom was very rude, wasn't she?
Yes.
And you were very rude.
Yes.
Attorney Dydas.
Thank you.
You've been a moment for this library.
I'm fine, thank you.
We've never met directly, have we?
No.
I think I attended a deposition and somebody took a review of you in this case.
Do you recall that?
Yes.
That was Mr. Walden.
And what?
Do you need help with that?
No, Walden.
I'm sorry.
Where do you work?
I work for Everytown for Gun Safety.
That's out of New York?
Yes.
And you have a grassroots organization as well?
Correct.
And that grassroots organization was founded by a woman named Shannon Watts?
Correct.
And she's someone from Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, correct?
Correct.
You weren't working for that group before the death of your mother?
It didn't exist before the death of my mother.
Was it formed because of the Sandy Hook shootings?
Everytown for gun safety or Moms Demand Action?
First one, let's do Everytown for gun safety.
No, I wouldn't say that it was formed because of the Sandy Hook shootings.
Do you know who funded it or funded it initially?
Is that Michael Bloomberg?
He's one of the funders, yes.
Former American Book?
Correct.
And then Moms for Gun Safety, was that?
Moms Demand Action for Gun Safety in America.
Moms Demand Action for Gun Safety in America.
Was that founded in the wake of Sandy Hook?
Yes, it was.
Did you have any interest in gun regulation prior to the death of your mother or gun control, gun safety?
I didn't really have any views on firearms.
Did the death of your mother change those views?
It formed views.
What cues did it form?
That there should be some sort of safety and security measures in place further than what I understood them to be at the time.
Do you have any idea when did you first learn about Alex Jones?
I believe it was the end of March or early April 2013. So shortly after your mother's death?
Correct.
And I believe you said this is when you became aware of him because others had alerted you to what was going on?
I was being tagged in posts about the hoax.
At any point since that point, the moment that you first learned the name Alex Jones, have you come to understand that he has a viewpoint, that he articulates a viewpoint on guns?
Not until I sat in this courtroom last week.
So is it your testimony, ma'am, that until you came into this courtroom, you didn't know that Alex Jones had a position?
I never watched his videos or read anything that he wrote outside of the couple of seconds that I testified to earlier.
Did he ever mention your name?
I wouldn't know.
I never watched any of his videos.
I didn't ask you whether you watched his name.
I'm asking you, do you know, has he ever mentioned his name?
I wouldn't know.
She answered a different question.
Has he ever mentioned your name?
I wouldn't know.
Wouldn't you want to find out before you sued him?
Did you read the complaint that was filed in this case before it was filed?
- Objection, you're on.
- Sustained.
This is a hearing and damages.
- Understood.
And how many people sued Alex Jones?
Objection, Your Honor?
Sustained.
How many plaintiffs are there in this case?
Objection, Your Honor?
I'll have a sidebar.
I'll withdraw and move on, Judge.
And I'll just mention- Objection.
Excuse me.
I'll just mention to the jury that we heard another political name a few minutes ago, and I'll just remind you that this case is not about politics.
It's a hearing and damages.
What year did you sue Alex Jones in?
I'll have to see council on the sideboard.
It's never collateral.
The issue of the only thing you're considering here is the extent of the.
Motive is never collateral and interest in the outcome.
She's working for a group that is...
I did now.
I mean, the record is what it is.
The law of the case is clear.
I don't I'm
I'm sorry, I cut you off, I apologize.
The only question here is getting reasonable, and she's exaggerating her damages as a way to get back Alex Jones back.
She's not a step, she doesn't know how much she's got you.
No, that's not what you said.
Give me no, give me no, give me no, just a little inference.
That's not what you said.
What she said, it's until she sat in this courtroom and saw things, and she's testifying in this courtroom.
I think I get to show her 1E and ask her.
I'm trying to refer 1E.
I need to have it up on screen.
What did the second is this?
1E, Judge.
Ma'am, do you have a screen?
I don't know which one you're looking at.
There's one next to you.
Look at anyone you like.
You've seen this video in this trial, correct?
A portion of it, yes.
Have you ever seen any?
Have you ever seen it before?
Before this trial?
No, I have not.
Can you play it, John?
They have hit the ground running in a buildup.
And I said, this is the attack.
People got to find the clips the last two months.
I said, they are launching attacks.
They're getting ready.
I can see them warming up with Obama.
They've got a bigger majority in the Congress now and the Senate.
They are going to come after our guns, look for mass shootings.
And then magically it happens.
They are coming.
They've already taken over health care.
the premiums are doubling, they're bankrupting that.
They're already shipped GM to China.
They are gonna gut this country, they're gonna shut down the power plants, they're gonna bankrupt us, they are re-educating us.
Just like we were Ukrainians, and they're Russians.
They want us bankrupt, they want the counties and the cities bankrupted and federalized.
The feds themselves run by globalists.
What does the new magazine say?
You can get it by subscribing.
You get 12 issues.
This man wants your guns.
And I break down here, they're declaring war on the Second Amendment period.
They are...
Never heard anything about it.
I liked that before until you came into this trial, correct?
Do you have any answers?
That's correct.
And as you sit here today, you don't know what Mr. Jones's position is about about guns, correct?
I don't believe I said that.
I don't believe I said that.
Do you know now?
Having watched this, it sounds like he thinks that the man on that magazine was coming for his gun.
Who was the man on that magazine?
President Obama.
And I'll just remind the jury again that this case is not about presidents, presidential elections, politics.
This is a hearing that damages where you are tasked And you've worked for every town for gun safety for seven years now?
It will be nine next month.
And you never knew what Alex Jones' position is on guns, correct?
Correct.
Until this trial.
That's correct.
Redirect?
Yes.
Let's play clip 1C. Same video.
okay well this is scope judge i don't know it's the same video
he's actually researching trails of the school and just found a linkedin time magazine article a school twitter photo of the little kids lined up just a few months ago school twitter photo of the Did you hear that?
Yes.
Did we see that photo earlier?
Same video, Your Honor?
Yes, I believe.
Excuse me.
I'll see counsel on the side of her, please.
It is the same video, but here's what I'm going to tell you.
I don't know how to say no colloquy, no comments.
I don't know.
What else do I need to say?
If it's directed to me, I'm not going to sit silently.
He's looking at me and telling me it's the same video.
It's not.
I showed one E. He's showing one C. It's a part I didn't show.
It's beyond the scope.
And I'm not going to take an admonishment in the presence of a jury from my adversary.
I'm just not going to take it.
Everybody can hear Mr. Mattis.
All right.
We're ready.
No, not yet.
I'll start with turning that in.
What do I need to do to stop the comments and the comments?
Just tell me what I need to do.
Do I need to hold one of you in contempt?
Charlie Pattis?
I'm not going to have the comments anymore.
I'm not going to have it.
I'm not going to have it.
Do you expect me to lay silently when they're directed at me inappropriately?
Do you expect me to roll over for my client?
It's not going to happen.
Can I just say?
No.
Thank you, Chair.
It's not.
He told the jury it was.
I objected scope.
He said it's the same video.
That's in proper and it's not that's for those guys.
We showed one you're showing it one see this You're showing a different cast It's not to see no show no it's not the clip that No, but it's not the clip that I showed.
That's the point of scope.
And for him to turn around, I showed one E, he showed one C. It's a different clip.
It's beyond the scope.
And he's telling me, he's announcing to the jury it is.
So he runs this courtroom, he doesn't.
So I think that the scope projection.
So I am going to overrule the attraction and I'm putting both all of you on notice that I'm not going to have the condense anymore.
It's a colloquy.
Whoever is the unlucky person, that's the next one to do it.
Well, the next time it happens, I'm going to ask to approach them and ask for an admonishment of counsel, because I am not going to take it.
You're not getting the last word in here, so I would suggest you stop.
I will say again, the next person who does it will be on the receiving end of the contempt hearing.
That's it.
That proposal is not related to this.
Can we take a 15-minute recess after this?
I hope we have a short day.
It would be a good time to break.
We just have one more witness.
Thank you.
Thank you, 10-year-old.
Let's play that clip again.
It's 1C and the same broadcast.
So, Judge, you played 1E.
I believe, Attorney Pattis, that you made your objection.
I overruled your objection.
The record is clear and we don't have to keep restating the objection.
Thank you.
Jakari Jackson was researching drills at the school and just found, linked in a Time Magazine article, a school Twitter photo of the little kids lined up just a few months ago.
So we saw a school Twitter photo of the kids lined up just a few months ago, right?
Correct, from my mom's Twitter account.
That school was open, right?
Absolutely.
Mr. Jones is referring to that photo, isn't he?
I believe so.
Okay.
Mr. Pat has asked you about your work at Everytown.
Correct.
And your work at Everytown, am I correct that you're focused on a specific program?
Two primary programs, yes.
And what are those?
Be Smart.
Excuse me.
Be Smart, which focuses on child access prevention and secure storage as well as suicide.
And the One Thing You Can Do program that focuses on extreme risk protection laws.
Again, a focus on suicide prevention.
And why did you decide to get into that work?
Because I care about people and I care about kids, just like my mom did.
And you don't know, other than what you just saw here, anything about Mr. Jones' view on guns?
Do you?
His view on guns?
Absolutely not.
I've never looked into it.
Do you care?
Absolutely not.
Do you know what his view is on climate change?
No.
Do you care?
No.
Do you know what his view is on the economy?
Not at all.
Do you...
Sustained.
Do you know what his views on the economy are?
You can ask if she knows what his views are.
Do you know what his views are on that?
Absolutely not.
This case was brought because there have been lies about me and my family and they would not stop.
Thank you.
Attorney Patis.
Can we continue with 1C, please?
Take your time.
Thank you.
You never saw the video 1C before today either?
Was 1C the one with the?
That's correct.
Or if Mr. Johns referred to the children as little angels?
I wouldn't know that.
Okay.
Nothing for you.
All right, you may step down.
And I think just watch your step.
I think we'll take the afternoon recess at this time, 15 minutes.
So we will reconvene at 3.15.
Ron will safeguard your notebooks and we will see you back in the evening.
So one thing I was thinking as I was walking back to my chambers after when we started our recess is during one of our many many many sidebars, Attorney Padgett.
is you had come up with what I thought was a really good suggestion, and I thought I took you up on it, that if there was any anticipation of any References or questions regarding presidents or presidential elections or politics that you would ask, I thought, for a sidebar.
I did not play it back to see if you were referring just to presidential elections and presidents or if we had also encompassed the Political arena, but I believed that we were talking about presidents, presidential elections, and politics.
So I think, and then of course I heard, I was a little surprised when I heard your question to Ms. Hoxcrum about the ex-mayor of New York City, Bloomberg, founding the organization that she worked for.
So I think moving forward is that if any council is looking to ask a question regarding presidents or presidential elections or political figures that you'll just ask please for the jury to be excused and we will proceed that way because I am not going to make this case And I think the defense keeps trying to inject
politics into it, and it's – I'm not going to change my course on it, so I just want to avoid any unpleasantness.
Well, do you understand what I just said, though, about – So instead of a sidebar, just ask for the jury to be excused and it's a lot easier to do it that way.
So just we're on the same page.
Presidents, presidential elections, political figures, politics.
Okay?
All right.
My neck hurts.
I'm turning to the left so much.
You're turning to the left.
I know, I get that too.
From my monitor at home, I get a creaking.
It looks like Mr. Jones is going to be here.
Ron?
I understand.
I'm calling in a second.
I'm not doing it.
I've never talked about it.
Ron, you're in charge.
I'm going to get COVID for the first time.
Thank you.
I would ask the court to consider not requiring every sign of our student work.
I am trying to be an officer of this.
I know you are.
And there are times where And here's my problem.
You may not be on this case forever.
And I don't know the next lawyer that may be filling in, and things can get said that weren't accurate, so I'm going to continue the way that we're doing it.
yet I'm happy if you don't want to do it, no, no.
If you want to do it a different way, but it's gotta be on the record.
- Now, I just, I think my request is rule the understanding of the ruling.
It came up in an earlier colloquy at Sidebar today and I thought I wanted to follow up to see if there's any room there that's life.
- Anything else?
- Nothing.
- Not for us.
- What time do you think we'll end today?
We have one more plaintiff and then we have some very short deposition testimony.
I'm going to give the jury instruction on deposition testimony.
When you told me you were going to give me the A-OK and I was going to do it.
You have it though, T-D-O. What's up more than you think?
The trial is moving more quickly than expected.
I was going to ask if it's at some point, but then I didn't want to jinx us, because even like today, we said we're going to end so early, and it doesn't mean the court isn't so early, so I don't know.
I didn't want to say we're going to end in a week or whatever.
I think we will know more after Mr. Jones tomorrow, and we'll know more soon.
Yeah, so we talked about, I just think of the law of the cases, right?
And so, you know, Mr. Jones is, I don't think they're going to permit me to take him outside the scope of the Direct, so I'll have to bring him back, and that'll be a new ordeal, but that's life.
I mean, I could ask you to use your discretion to maybe go all the way, but I'm not going to.
And so I think that he'll be, right now, my only witness.
Yeah, so, I mean, I think if Mr. Jones wraps up relatively quickly, then, you know, I think we'll be able to have a better assessment of, like, how far would it go?
You two have a fairly good idea, and let me know, and then I will give them a heads up, because they have lives too, and they don't have to, and plus, you know, if we lose another juror or something because they think All right, so we're ready for our panel yes sir
okay okay okay okay sorry okay okay okay okay
okay
okay welcome back please be seated Council will stipulate that the panel has returned.
We do, yes.
All right.
Whenever you're ready, counsel.
Take your time.
Thank you, Your Honor.
We're going to call Jen Hensel.
Very well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You may be seated.
And then I just need you to state your name, slowly spelling your last name for the record, and the state and county you live in.
Jennifer Hensel, H-E-N-S-E-L, in Fairfield County, Connecticut.
Thank you.
Ms. Anselm, I'm sure you've heard me say to everyone, you have yourself at any time, if you'd like, anywhere.
Okay?
Okay.
And you may inquire whenever you're ready, counsel.
Thank you very much, Judge.
And good afternoon, Jen.
Yeah, thank you for being so flexible.
We had you scheduled, I think, every day of this trial.
Can you just tell to the jury, first of all, Can you tell us what the name of your daughter was?
Her name was Aviel.
And did Aviel...
Did Aviel...
Did you lose Aviel in the Sandy Hook shooting?
She died in the Sandy Hook shooting.
Okay.
Now...
I want you to talk to the jury and explain to them who you are, where you come from, where you grew up, things like that, okay?
So, I grew up in rural Iowa, Eastern Iowa, real close to the Mississippi River on a farm.
My parents weren't farmers.
They were, um, my mother was a nurse and my dad was an electrician, but we lived on a farm and I had a farming lifestyle.
All my friends were farmers.
My parents, well, my friends were children of farmers.
Um, It was a magical place to grow up.
We were outside all the time, all through winters and summers.
We spent a lot of time outside, playing and working.
We did a lot of work.
And just because my parents weren't farmers didn't mean that the local farmers didn't employ us.
All the children had jobs.
My entire family was there.
My father's family was close by.
My mother's family was close by.
So I had first, second, third cousins, great aunts, great uncles, great grandparents.
I was just surrounded by amazing people and a lot of love growing up.
And give us a sense of the size of this town.
What was the name of the town?
The town's name was Sabula.
It means sandy beaches.
It's in an American Indian language that was close to where I grew up or what was formerly there.
And it's spelled S-A-B-U-L-A. And it's an island on the Mississippi River.
And the island itself is a town of about 500 people.
And our residence was on the bluffs of the Mississippi River.
And Were there sandy beaches?
There were sandy beaches, yes.
And did there come a time when you went to college?
There was a time, but it was so cold I ended up moving to the University of Arizona, well I didn't move to the University of Arizona, I moved to Tucson, Arizona.
Because it was so cold in the winter, I was tired of that, and I enrolled in the University of Arizona where I did an undergraduate degree there.
So did you start college in Iowa?
I did.
So I started in Iowa.
There happened to be a blizzard one year, and I just thought, I've lived here my whole life.
It's time to move and do something new.
So I moved to where it's really, really hot.
And you said you got an undergraduate degree.
Can you tell the jury what you got an undergraduate degree in?
I've always been interested in the sciences, especially diseases, and so my bachelor's degree was in microbiology, immunology.
In an undergraduate?
That's an undergraduate degree, yes.
Okay.
And where did this interest in science come from?
My parents.
There was always talk of science and engineering and math and physics in my home.
Despite them not having graduate degree educations, they Always.
They were so good about always exploring.
Everything was an exploratory exercise in our house.
What did you learn?
Why did you do that?
When we were getting in trouble, it was always, what made you think about doing that?
Broken bones were that way.
How did you jump off that hay mound and think that that was going to be okay?
What kind of choices were you thinking about at that time?
So science and exploration were always just secondary to who we were growing up.
And my entire, both my siblings are in science as well.
And did there come a time when you perhaps fell low?
Oh, yes.
So...
I'm talking about all of you.
I'm sorry, can you say that?
Did there come a time when you met somebody, fell in love, who later became somebody you married?
Oh yeah, definitely.
So, I had gotten myself into a situation where I just was not at all Happy in this relationship and I broke up with this boy at the time young man And I was just miserable and I wanted to take at that time the hardest course you could possibly take as an undergraduate in my field and And when I say this,
it may seem silly, but at that time it was a class called Recombinant Methods in DNA Biology.
And that was a big class at the time, but really 5th, 6th, 7th graders learn all of these techniques now, so it's not that big of a deal anymore, but at the time it was.
And I met this man, young man.
He was younger than I was.
He had long black curly hair.
Half of his face smiled.
When he'd smile, his eyes would disappear.
You couldn't see his eyes.
And I walked into this classroom and he just smiled at me and I sat next to him.
I'm like, how could I not sit next to this person?
And we became friends and we were friends for a long time before we decided to Become romantic partners.
And the reason wasn't my fault.
It was his.
He was on some sort of journey.
He called it his years of isolation, where he chose not to date anyone, not to go out and hang out with anybody.
He was reading all the time.
And the only way I could spend time with this man was to study with him.
I made him become my study partner.
That's how we fell in love over DNA. Does this man have a name by the way?
He has a few names, but I always called him Jer, but his name is Jeremy.
He was just Jer to me.
And did there come a time when you were able to...
Extract Jeremy from his state of isolation and further the relationship?
We had to get into graduate school for that.
So we had both applied to graduate school.
He was in a pharmacology and toxicology program with an emphasis on the brain, neuroscience.
I continued my explorations in diseases and Worked toward a master's degree and achieved that eventually in what's called pathobiology, and it's just how diseases interact with your body.
Should I repeat that?
Okay.
Sorry, you were explaining you were getting a master's in pathobiology.
I was, and there was one night when Jer just asked me, he's like, do you want to date me?
And I'm like, yeah.
Yeah, I do.
So that's just how we ended up.
And it was just that simple.
Life was simple with him.
It was just straightforward.
And on other days, other things weren't so simple, but that was pretty obvious.
We really, really loved each other even then.
Where were you physically located?
Tucson.
Tucson, still in Tucson, okay.
And did there come a time when you and Jeremy got married?
We were together 10 years before we married.
So did there come a time when you and Jeremy moved from Tucson to somewhere else?
So we traveled.
With these degrees, we needed to travel for our professions.
And so...
You often have to continue your education outside of achieving these degrees.
So we moved at that point to Nashville, Tennessee, and attended a university there, Vanderbilt, to continue these professions that we were interested in, are interested in.
We were there for three years.
At Vanderbilt?
At Vanderbilt.
And were you each earning degrees at the same time?
No.
Jeremy was doing what's called a postdoctoral fellowship, which is after you get a PhD, you do that before you go out and you get a job.
I had a master's degree and so what I needed to do was expand, just expand my techniques and skill levels and so I worked in a couple of different labs there.
And did there come a time when you and Jeremy moved out west?
We did.
When we moved to Nashville, we knew that it wasn't going to be a lifelong event, and so we put a three to four year cap on that, and wherever we would go from there was going to be up in the air, and it just happened to be San Diego where we ended up.
Any particular reason?
I think because Jeremy, I could get a job almost anywhere, but Jeremy couldn't.
At the higher your level of education, the less opportunity there is for a position.
So he was able to actually Get a position there that he really loved and he really wanted.
There were other options around the country, but San Diego, we had friends there.
Really, really good friends there.
And San Diego is a beautiful place to live.
So we thought, let's give that a try.
And that's what we did.
And did there come a time when you and Jeremy had a child?
Yes, we did get married before her.
Yeah, so we got married because he asked me to marry him on the beach in San Diego and it was just so, it was just the two of us.
He's like, you've been my partner and my friend for so long.
You've been my partner and my friend for so long.
And he asked me to marry him.
And I, of course, said yes.
And we had a great party, a great wedding.
And a few years after that, we were never going to have children.
We just didn't think that that was in our cards.
And then one day I woke up and I'm like, wow, my biological clock really does exist.
I really want to have a child.
And so I asked him, I said, this may be a deal breaker for us.
Could be a deal breaker.
We never wanted to have children, and now I want to have one, and I want to have one with you.
So can you consider that?
Can you please consider that?
And he was really nervous about that.
He was scared about it.
It was not something that we had ever planned.
It took him about five days, and I was getting a little nervous about it.
And he came back, he's like, yeah, yeah, let's have a baby.
And so we had this gorgeous little girl, and she was just so magical.
And we named her Aviel.
And I'd like to move to introduce 484 and 485, two photographs of the people armed for ID.
Objection, Judge.
You talked about, well, actually, I just want to show the jury picture 485, please.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So, who are these people?
That's me on the left, and Jeremy is on the right, and that's Aviel in the middle.
And about how old was Aviel and where were you, do you think, at the time this picture was taken?
She was three, so that would have been 2009, December 2009. And did there come a time when, oh, let me ask you, well, yeah, did there come a time when you and Jeremy moved to Aviel, the three of you went and moved to Sandy Hook?
We spent quite a few years in San Diego and there was just a time when I wanted to think about leaving San Diego and Jeremy was considering leaving San Diego and so he began a job search and we were looking at various parts of the country again and And I said, please consider the Northeast Corridor.
I would like us to maybe try living there.
We had never lived out here before, and so we ended up here in 2011. Here being in San Diego?
In Connecticut, yes.
Okay.
And how old was Abiel?
She was four.
When you moved out in 2011?
And can you tell the jury and me what Abigail was like?
What was her identity to you?
Tell us about her.
So this girl had crazy, crazy curly hair and she had her father's smile.
Just half of her face was this smile just like his.
And she would She was not at all shy, to the point where it was actually quite terrifying.
She would just walk up to a stranger and hang out with a stranger, want to know a stranger.
Sometimes she'd just rambunctiously run off, and we would find her because people would be surrounded by her.
We never lost her for long.
I'm not saying we lost her for long.
More than maybe a minute, but a minute is terrifying.
And she would be surrounded by people who just wanted to be around her.
Gregarious and loud.
She was so loud.
Funny.
I guess we would lose her, and occasionally we'd walk up and we would hear, A-V-I-E-L-L-E, A-V-L. Because people were just curious, like, what does that name, like, I've never heard that name before.
And she got really pretty tired of explaining her name to people, but she did.
She let them know her name.
she would always let them know her name yeah she wrote that line pretty tightly Sometimes there was trouble.
I walked out of the house one day and she knew I kept a stash of bubblegum in my car.
She had locked herself in my car and I went outside and she knew she had been caught.
I saw the gum in her mouth and her pupils were so black because I think she got panicked.
I think she got scared that I was going to be like, what are you doing in my car eating all this gum?
But all I could do was just laugh at her because I couldn't even see her eyes.
Her pupils were so big.
She was so scared that I was going to be mad at her.
But she would turn around and Just crawl into your arms and snuggle and just be our only child.
She was her only child.
She was everything.
It didn't matter if she was naughty.
It really didn't.
Are you saying anything spoiled?
Yeah, I did.
We've got to show the jury a picture of what you're talking about, 484.
I don't know what you're talking about with the hair.
Can you tell the jury, when was this picture taken?
First of all, can you just identify this?
Is this Avial?
This is Avial, yes.
And can you tell the jury when this picture was taken?
This picture was taken, she was in first grade in the fall of 2012. And who was her teacher?
Victoria Soto.
And who took this picture?
Mrs. Soto took this photo.
It's in her classroom.
The photo was taken in Victoria Soto's first grade classroom?
Yes.
Mrs. Soto, Victoria's mother, gave me this photo after they died.
We've already, the jury's already heard about the day from two, among other things, eyewitnesses, Bill Altenberg and Carly Soto-Parisi, and I'm not going to ask you about that day.
I do, I would like to ask you, the last, I guess the last thing you remember about seeing Avi and So we were supposed to go to the Rockettes that day.
She wasn't supposed to be in school.
But they had a special activity that they were going to do.
And so my husband happened to stay home from work that day, and he was going to work in the morning from home, help her with her activity.
And then we were going to leave the school before lunch around 11, 11.15.
And he walked her to the school bus.
Normally that was me.
And I noticed that she was outside.
It was a chilly morning, and she didn't have a coat.
And I thought, gosh, you know, it's pretty darn cold.
So I ran a coat out to her, and the bus pulled up.
And there weren't very many children on the bus, but there was a few.
and she got on and we were just blowing kisses.
Now, after December 14, 2012, 2012, tell us a little bit about the week after or two weeks after.
Well, the week after, there were just funerals.
So I live on a real prominent highway.
And we would see other families in their funeral processions going by our house.
And we had people from all over the country, because we had lived all over the country, and they came to our house to help us.
They were there within 24 hours.
And one of those funerals, we were told that there was no space.
There was...
We had heard, because other people had had their family funerals before ours, that the media was relentless.
We had heard things at this point.
That some people had thought that this was not a real event, that it was a hoax.
And so we did our best to not publicly state where Aviel's funeral was or when it was going to be.
And it was through word of mouth, by family and friends only.
And so our funeral happened within a few days.
And then you just think, you know, the house is quiet.
The house doesn't have a child in it anymore.
Even though there's grown-ups around and they're trying to help you, it's definitely quiet.
I couldn't sit in chairs.
I was on the floor all the time because if you stood up, the whole world was not right.
And you felt like you were just gonna fly off the earth.
Like you couldn't be held down to the earth.
Because everything was wrong.
Everything was wrong now.
Everything was wrong.
When did you first hear about this issue about you being an actor?
Is there anything about being folks?
children not having died.
We had heard about the hoax, but we didn't think we were part of it outside of just this general thought, right?
We didn't know.
And we were staying away from the media because it was just relentless.
Everything was relentless.
It was really hard, hard.
So I didn't realize that we were truly part of this hoax for a few weeks.
You weren't, by the way.
It's been established that you weren't.
You actually weren't.
Okay, we'll withdraw.
When did you first become aware that people were saying things about you or families?
In January of 2013. So we had heard...
Jeremy and I just walking through our home, and our home had people there helping us, and they were whispering and...
And they didn't want to tell us what was happening.
They didn't want to tell us that it was out there, that this idea that this didn't happen.
And I think Jeremy might have just said, you guys, what's happening?
What are you doing?
What are you talking about?
And that's when we heard that there were people talking about this not being real.
And did you and Jeremy...
Establish any foundations in the aftermath?
One does that because you have to do something when everything you hold dear is taken away from you and it's taken away in such a way that is not at all okay.
We had to do something.
We had to put this energy that was no longer being a parent into something else.
And so we established a foundation to try to help what happened to us not happen to anybody else again.
What was the name of that foundation?
It was named after our daughter.
It was a way to honor her legacy.
And it was called the Aviel Foundation.
And did you establish this early on?
January 2013 it became an entity, yes.
January 2013?
That early.
And what was, can you just describe to the jury the idea or the mission behind it?
So Jeremy and I are scientists and we knew that there were factors about 12-14 that were being addressed by others that maybe we could have been a part of or helped,
but we knew that for someone to do what they did to our children and our educators, that brain must have been really, really sick.
And how do you help fix that?
And so we established a neuroscience foundation to study the underpinnings of what causes somebody to be violent and what protects somebody from becoming violent.
And it was a research and community organization that we developed and put into place, and it's still in existence, just under another name.
Did you and Jeremy create content for this or have a website?
Tell us a little bit about that.
So we had to create all of our own content.
This was an original idea at this point.
There were no other people in science working on the biological effects of what causes violence.
There's nobody else doing that.
And my husband was...
Skilled in neuroscience.
So he knew the brain.
I'm a skilled scientist.
So yes, we created all the content for that website and for our, just everything that came from the Avial Foundation, we worked on that together.
And did there come a time when the claim, the lies about Sandy Hook that were being said about families and actors not happening intersected with the foundation?
Almost immediately.
Can you tell the jury about that?
So when the website was launched, We had buttons for donations.
We had email us here at www, well not, it was like jeremy.richmond at that time.
There's only two of us, jeremy.richmond at the Aviel Foundation or jennifer.hensel at the Aviel Foundation.
And we had a few other people on board, so there's a few emails there, but We received at that point so many great supporters.
We were receiving so much support for the idea that we wanted to help that.
However, filtering in were people who were attacking our idea and attacking us as Actors and telling us that AVL didn't exist and that we were just trying to get money from the public.
And how dare we do something like that?
And eventually those became more and more.
But the idea for us was...
Let's not pay attention to that.
Let's pay attention to what's good here.
Let's put some beauty back in the world.
Let's not pay attention to the ugliness that's happening to us right now.
So we would delete those.
Could you ever get ahead of those?
No.
They filtered in, and then they ended up flooding in.
If we did any sort of media to promote our mission for our foundation, then it would come at us like the floodgates were opening.
And they would take any sort of...
any sort of...
Content that we had and try to manipulate that in ways that were trying to portray us as liars and fraudsters.
I think a fraudster came up numerous times and how we were trying to fleece money from the American public and that And worse, it wasn't just that.
It ended up being that, you know, our daughter is alive.
How can you do that?
She's alive.
There's proof out there that she's alive.
Then eventually it became she never existed.
That she never existed and that we were actors and...
Janet, tell us about that she never existed and what that's like.
Okay, so going from one child in this house who takes up all your space, who, who, she shouldn't have died.
None of these people in this event should have died.
So how do you go from living...
I don't know.
It's...
She was such a big presence.
How do you negate a presence?
How do you do that?
And say that somebody doesn't exist anymore?
How do you do that?
And that's what happened.
That's what happened to us. - Did you receive her letter saying that you're a liar How could you do this?
Your children...
Objection, bleeding, best evidence for your sake.
Did there come a time when you received a letter that talked about your children not deserving, that you and your children...
Objection, bleeding again.
I'm asking...
What was the question?
Sorry, Judge.
Did you receive letters challenging Your daughter's very existence and your existence.
We did.
There was also a website that challenged my daughter's existence with theories behind it.
It was on the internet.
Did you have any sense as to how many people or how many millions of people or how many At that time, no.
I do now.
Can you describe whether to the jury whether or not being repeatedly told that your child didn't exist interfered with your ability to come to grips and heal from Abigail's death?
Have you ever healed fully?
Has one ever healed?
I don't think you heal from something like this.
I think I think you forever hold grief and you rebuild some joy back into your life and it balances and some days and other days one takes over the other and other days the grief is just so awful.
Then you add on the idea that people think that you made all this up for money or that Or that your child didn't exist.
That compounds everything on top of anything you do.
And you can't...
I couldn't work.
I write for a living.
And I couldn't form sentences.
So when they tell...
I was told that my daughter, like on this website, that she never existed.
It makes it hard to work.
It makes it hard to get out of bed every day.
It makes it hard to just push that away.
Because you have to push that away.
That continual noise of all of the people saying...
That we faked this and that it never happened and that she's still alive somewhere.
God, if she were, wouldn't that be amazing?
But she wasn't.
And then that she never existed.
Yeah, that's incredibly difficult.
Did people use photographic evidence as proof that Avia was still alive?
There's a photo out there, yes.
Can you tell the jury about that?
There's this beautiful little girl in my hometown, well, at that time in Connecticut, Sandy Hook, and these two little at that time in Connecticut, Sandy Hook, and these two little girls happen to be at the same Um...
They both had dark curly hair, gigantic smiles.
They looked a lot alike, but they were separated in age by a few years.
And my daughter came home and She said, there's this girl at school.
She looks just like me, Mom.
And she's my reading partner.
And because the older kids would help the younger kids with their reading.
And I thought that was really, really sweet that the school put them together because they looked alike.
And when my daughter died, her reading partner, her Her peer at school, this other little girl, became central to many of these people who propagate the hoax that Aviel never died and that this is evidence with this child,
this other child's photo, that this was proof that she never died.
They took a That was, yeah, it was at an event.
What was the event?
The Super Bowl of 2013. So, I don't know, who, somebody, where was this disseminated?
Where did it go out, to your knowledge?
Where did it go out?
Let me rephrase that.
How did you become aware of it?
Probably multiple ways.
We still had people in our home, and occasionally we would find out what was happening through friends who were watching what was happening on the Internet.
Through local people who knew this other family and said, this is happening to this other family as well as to you.
So, uh...
You're bringing this case Jeremy died in March of 2019?
Yes.
By suicide?
By suicide.
And did the hoax over hold?
What did the hoaxers, the people who were doing these things to you, this is the Alex Jones part, okay?
What did they do with Jeremy's death by suicide?
Extra Foundation.
We had heard from people in town that some of these people who believed in this hoax...
What did you say?
Sustained.
What's her damages?
Did it not bring her to her truth?
Okay, what did you...
I received phone calls that said people were in the cemetery looking for Jeremy's...
Okay?
It's not.
Can I have a sideboard?
Is there an exception that I'm missing?
Yeah, it's everything we've been talking about.
Sorry, sorry.
Everything we've been talking about getting emails here is having somebody say something.
Sorry?
Now she's getting a phone call.
She's going to get a phone call explaining what's going on.
that's her damages that she had found Hang on, what's the other time?
Sorry.
We're not claiming that.
So can you come to the council?
So he wanted to tell me what I'm going to tell the jury so that they're not confused.
Well, nothing right now.
I can establish we're not claiming any pure suicide, but the hoax extends.
It gets brought into the hoax.
So it's now...
I'm sorry?
That's one thing.
Right.
This is all...
I had a predicate for bringing him...
His test now becomes part of the whole hoax that...
Remind me about the business direction that I forgot.
March of 2019. There was no amended complaint.
I claim that this is beyond the scope of a complaint.
If they wanted to claim this, I would have thought that there would be no result.
So I'm going to object on relevance counts.
I'm trying to get her to, I mean, first of all, it became part of the It was the effects of her damages as a result of this hoax are possible, right?
That is what the case is about.
So this hoax starts, he's created by John.
All of this stuff goes from that.
And he gets brought into...
What is that?
Alex Jones, is that what you're trying to say?
No, no, no, no.
What others say.
It became like people were investigating, making it say this fake guy, you know, was part of that fake, fake, fake, fake.
But I can make it clear that one How do you propose to do that?
We're not making a public statement.
What could be more clear than that?
Oh, I would say, look, just to be clear, you're not, we're not claiming that any, any, uh...
It's either caused his death, or neither are you claiming it, or neither are you seeking damages for his death.
Okay.
Okay.
Hold on.
Josh?
Josh.
Sorry, Josh.
No, I thought you were going to...
I still believe it's outside the scope of meetings, and it is such an, you know, and I just think it's outside the scope of meetings.
Right, on that issue, I will overrule the objection, but you're going to say what you want to say.
I just want to make sure I get it right, because you've got to get a copy of that transcript.
Neither he nor I has the ability to remember what he says.
Is that what I'm saying?
You are not claiming that Mr. Jones caused your husband's suicide, and you are not asking for his jury to compensate for his loss.
That's what we agreed to say.
I have a question.
So it's 10 before.
Um, how long is the deposition transfer?
It's short.
I have no cross at this point.
Okay, so we're going to do that.
And I just want to make up.
So there's objections that they're going to disregard that they can consider the answers.
Is this one of the videos where there are, is it a video deposition?
It's actually a deposition.
There's no objection to what we designate.
But I thought that something somebody submitted said that there were objections that were made that should be disregarded.
Is this one of the- Yes.
But they can consider the answers, so disregard the objections and they can consider the answers.
They don't play the objections.
They don't play the objections.
One more time.
The way the video was cut, they don't play the objections.
So they're going to hear it.
Right.
So the agreed upon language was disregard the objections and you can consider the response.
Or focus only on the objections.
Yeah.
I'm sorry, Jen.
So I just want to be clear.
We were talking about Jeremy, and I want to be clear with the jury and through you.
You're not claiming that defendants caused Jeremy's suicide, is right, right?
Not as a direct cause, no.
Okay.
And you're not seeking, we're not seeking damages as a result of his death?
No.
Okay.
The question though is, did Jeremy's death, did these people bring in Jeremy's death to this narrative that this lie at the Sandy Hook never happened and so forth?
Yes.
Can you explain to the jury how that occurred?
People were in the cemetery around Avial's grave marker looking for evidence that Jeremy had died.
And I don't have a grave marker for Jeremy right now.
I haven't quite figured out how I want to do that yet and to honor him in his way.
And so they wouldn't have found something there, but that for them was enough proof to say that he never died or that I was making this up.
Let me say you were making this up.
You were making up this.
Is this part of you making up being an act for the whole thing?
It tied into the general overall narrative of the hoax.
Of the hoax.
And how did you become, how were you made aware of this, that there were people looking around those grave stuff?
Was it Fabiel's grave site?
I received phone calls.
From people I knew in town.
And what was that like for you?
It was relatively soon after Jeremy's death and I was still reeling from that and I had to compartmentalize that.
I couldn't I couldn't wrap my head around just one more family member being part of this narrative.
Have you ever come to terms with that?
It simply doesn't end, so I don't know if you can come to terms with it.
Have you?
No.
You talked about moving to Sandy Hook and raising Abigail.
By the way, you did have subsequent children with Jeremy, right?
I did.
I didn't need to...
Oh, that's okay.
Sorry about that.
You have two children with Jeremy.
Right.
And how old are they?
They are seven and five.
Okay, so you're raising them?
I am.
And can you give the jury a sense as to whether or not this whole thing, this Alex Jones piece, has affected your sense of security?
Your feelings of safety in your own home and in public?
So when I had Jeremy with me and parenting with me, there were two eyes always around.
We look in the back of our cars, we look through, we look around us, circles of awareness.
Who's on the horizon that is going to create trouble?
It's just how we've grown used to living.
And now it feels like it's, and it doesn't feel like it is, it's just it's all on my shoulders now.
Their safety of my children, of my property, as a sanctuary.
They're so little, they don't know.
They don't...
They simply don't know anything.
When they're old enough to find out, I'm going to have a lot of explaining to do, and that's going to be really, really hard.
Now, single parents and single parents always are in control to some extent of their kids' safety and security, right?
Right.
So how is that different, if at all, as a result of this Alex Jones case?
Can you describe that to the jury?
Can you ask me again, please?
I'm just wondering, because as parents, some of us are parents, some of us aren't, but as parents, we are concerned about our kids' safety.
We're in charge of our kids' safety.
So that is something that everybody has some of, right?
Right.
And so can you just tell the jury, what is it about Alex Jones' publication to tens of millions of people that affects that dynamic for you, - What are you, if anything? - So they're so young.
Their innocence is so beautiful right now.
And at some point, there are a horde of people out there who could hurt them, shouldn't hurt them, shouldn't talk about them, shouldn't even know about them.
And because of what has happened after 12-14 and this hoax, they will know about that at some point.
I want to keep them as innocent as I can for a long time.
They don't know why we check the back seats.
I say, what's in the back seat?
Is there a dog back there?
We've got to make sure the dog's out of there.
So everything's a game right now for them.
They don't understand why we do what we do, and there's no reason for them to understand that at this point.
So yeah, it's a big deal.
A lot of people know about us.
They don't know about anybody.
And when you go out with your children, what are their names by the way?
Imogen and Owen.
And when you go out with your children, do you have any idea whether you're surrounded by friends or enemies?
I'm always looking.
I'm always looking and scanning.
Always.
So I don't know.
I hope not, but I'm always looking.
Thank you, Jim.
Attorney Pettis?
No questions, Judge.
You may step down.
Just take your time and lunch.
Your Honor, what we now like to do is play the excerpted video recorded deposition of Robert Jacobson.
All right, and this is exhibit?
It has been pre-marked as an exhibit.
I believe the fully designated deposition was marked as an exhibit.
I can get a pre-recorded number.
I don't have any hand.
So you're now going to hear the testimony of the witness.
That was mentioned as recorded under oath at an earlier time.
Your role as jurors in assessing testimony that's presented in this manner is no different than if the witness were here in court to testify.
and you should pay careful attention as the videotape testimony is played.
You should not make any adverse interest Inference from the fact that the witness was not present in court to testify, but rather you should consider this testimony in the same way that you consider all the other evidence in this trial.
Finally, you should disregard any objection that you hear that is made, which means that you can consider the answers despite the objections.
This is Primarch's exhibit.
Okay, I have two exhibits for Jacobson.
You may.
This is the Connecticut.
Yes, sir.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Jason, as you know, my name is Chris Maddy.
I represent the plaintiffs in this matter.
I'm going to be taking you to that position today.
When did you first start working with Alex Jones?
I started working with Alex Jones in 2005 around, I believe it was around the fall of 2005.
What were the circumstances around you coming to work with Alex Jones?
I was introduced to him by our associate, Kevin Booth, to work to edit a film for Did there come a point in your employment where,
beyond the Yes, at the end of my career at InfoWars, I was creating what so-called hot topics, which were one-minute news briefs, which would appear in the commercial breaks of his radio show.
It would also appear in his negative news show, which he was producing at the time.
And it would also help the other on-air talent,...produced news vignettes, which would appear either on Alice's radio show or in the nightly news show that he produced.
Were you aware of...
...free speech systems reporting concerning the San Diego shooting in the immediate aftermath of the event?
Objection.
I was aware that some writers were preparing stories and I knew that they were along the lines of, you know, that it was not a true shooting event and they were preparing stories in that nature.
Was it your understanding Wrote stories in a manner so as to please Mr. Jones?
Yes.
Now you're testifying today pursuant to a subpoena, correct?
Yes.
Even in the absence of a subpoena, would you have been willing to testify voluntarily in this matter?
I would.
Why is that?
Because I felt what happened with San Diego, the after result, it disturbed me so much.
And I knew what happened inside the office that I didn't want to be part of that.
I wanted people to know that Alex, his writers and himself, was warned that he was not doing legitimate journalism and there were repercussions.
Did you believe that one of the repercussions of Mr. Jones' conduct in that of his employees was to cause harm to the surviving family members of murdered children and educators at San Diego?
Objection.
Yes, that's what I found.
And that completes our presentation for today as well as Ron.
Alrighty, so we are going to end for today.
Ron will collect and secure your notepads.
It is very important, and I know you've been prompt for every morning and every afternoon and every recess, but it's important that you continue to do so, and extremely important that you continue to obey the rules of juror conduct, especially with respect to avoiding any media coverage.
All right?
So, safe travels home.
▲
Export Selection