by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB

(Note: This article first appeared on September 23, 2022 at New Hampshire's GraniteGrok.com, with the title "Is Alex Jones Trial a Gag Order for America?)

I recently published a book entitled Unreality: "Sandy Hook Messes Minds." The PDF is linked below. During the first half of the book, I thought the school shooting did occur; for the second half I changed my tune. My conclusion? It's a near certainty that the entire event of December 2012 was a scripted "show."

Since that is basically good news -- no child died -- I'd hate to invest any more of my time on Sandy Hook. But now we have the Alex Jones fandangle. I think it's very telling that the mainstream media -- which never covered the negative argument -- is heavily covering Jones' trial.

Possibly Jones is somehow "in on it." After being sued by some people for hurting their feelings (by broadcasting, year after year, that no children died at Sandy Hook), he has said he was wrong, that the children did die, and that he is sorry he hurt anyone's feelings.

Today he is up for millions of dollars in damages; the trial to determine the amount is now before a jury in Waterbury, Connecticut. So, should I be worried about my wallet? I have similarly published that there were no deaths at school on that famous day. Can I be sued? Could I even be charged with crime?

At the moment, we Americans have a Constitution, containing a First Amendment that makes it OK for me to express my opinion. I can say anything I please. I can say "We never had a president named Abraham Lincoln." I can say "Hunter Biden engaged in activities that were treasonous to the US."

My cuckoo statement about Lincoln won't hurt anyone. My allegation of crime by Hunter Biden will hurt him, but I am still allowed to say it. It's not criminal. Hunter can sue me for damages, for defaming him, but the law states that "truth is a defense." So he'll lose his case against me if I can show the basis of my statement.

And where would I get, say, emails that he wrote? The court is obliged to assist my defense -- as well as his plaint -- by way of subpoenas. This is known as Discovery. All will be put on the table.

Incidentally, per the famous precedent of Sullivan v New York Times, if the plaintiff is a public figure -- broadly defined -- the defendant (the defamer) is allowed to throw dirt at him, unless it is done with knowledge of its falsity or outright malice (i.e., no meaningful purpose other than to harm the defamed).

So How's the Parchment Doing These Days?

Doth not the current agony that Alex Jones is enduring prove that our Constitution has changed, such that it was illegal for him to call Sandy Hook a hoax?

I have three answers: No, no, and no.

First, if there had been a withdrawal of the First Amendment from the Constitution, you'd have heard about it. In fact, you'd have participated in it. The process of amending is difficult -- as was intended by the Founding Fathers. Just trust me on that one -- we have not lost our legal right to blather away on any subject we like. All is constitutionally intact regarding free speech.

Second, Alex Jones never had a judge or jury say that his claims of a Sandy Hook hoax were untrue! That matter did come to court, but a judge made a DEFAULT ruling.

I don't mean that the judge said "Let's call a halt; Jones is wrong, case closed." Rather, she asked Alex Jones to present some papers about his finances AND HE DECLINED to do so. You're not allowed to disobey a judge, so that very disobedience brought the "case" to an end.

(Note: sometime prior to the default, Jones retracted his assertion that Sandy Hook never happened. This often happens when one is sued for defamation, in hopes that it will cause the plaintiff to drop the complaint.)

The media now want us to believe that there was a court case in which Jones' claim of a hoax was adjudicated. Definitely not. He failed to comply with a discovery order. He did not even protest, to a higher court, that default judgment. That's why I suspect Alex is somehow in on it. And yesterday he called a press conference, to make a stink about the court proceedings, without revealing the main issue that I am dwelling on here.

Jones -- and his attorneys -- don't even react when CNN claims that Jones was found "liable". No, he was not found liable. A default judgement is not a finding on the merits. The current proceedings before a jury have only to do with establishing the amount Jones must pay, based on that judge's default ruling. And by the way, it's a civil case, based on tort law; criminality is not being alleged against Jones.

Third (my third "no" to the question of whether Americans now have to shutta da mouf), there is the James Fetzer case. Prof Fetzer has petitioned the US Supreme Court to look at his Wisconsin case, and on October 3, 2022 -- very soon -- SCOTUS will decide whether or not to hear that case.

It is somewhat similar to the Jones matter -- Fetzer is being asked to fork over megabucks to Leonard Posner, father of a child, Noah, that Fetzer says didn't die at Sandy Hook.

Fetzer edited a book entitled "Nobody Died at Sandy Hook; It Was a FEMA Drill To Support Gun Control." In it, he said he doesn't think Noah's death certificate is valid. Posner sued for defamation, saying that Fetzer defames him by alleging that he submitted a phony death certificate.

It should be easy enough to prove or disprove "truth" to settle the case, one way or the other. Fetzer had two experts standing by, who claim they see evidence of inauthenticity in the death certificate. Their affidavits are in the file. So, did a judge or jury rule on that?

No. It ended with a SUMMARY judgement, which is not the same as a default judgement. Judge Frank Remington summarily decided that the experts' affidavits were just opinion that he could ignore.

His Honor also chose to ignore the fact that Fetzer had made a demand (as is customary) to have a jury decide the case. Both of those decisions violate Fetzer’s due process rights -- to discovery, and to a jury decision as to liability.

Further Action -- To Put Everything on the Table

I see that Prof Fetzer, age 81, has just issued a press release, offering to be interviewed by any interested person. He lists his phone number as 608 835 2707, and says that all pleadings are available at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-7916.html

Below is a link to the PDF of my Book "Unreality: Sandy Hook Messes Minds." (Also available at Lulu.com for $15.00) As stated above, I am loathe to put more time into this subject. Time is precious when we have nuclear war hanging over us. Still, it's necessary to combat the practice of deceit, as that could well be involved in all governmental decisions, including nuclear war.

I urge you to stand up for truth. You won't be sued for a million dollars, and you won't be arrested, either. Insisting on truth is a matter of survival. Whatever the risks, please do it!

(Note: The article at hand is public domain; I ask you to share it around, before the looming October 3 date at SCOTUS. That's when James Fetzer gets his final chance for justice.)