Alex Jones attempts to answer questions asked by Mark Bankston, lawyer for Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, during trial in Austin, Texas. AP
Alex Jones attempts to answer questions asked by Mark Bankston, lawyer for Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, during trial in Austin, Texas. AP
Alex Jones attempts to answer questions asked by Mark Bankston, lawyer for Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, during trial in Austin, Texas. AP
Alex Jones attempts to answer questions asked by Mark Bankston, lawyer for Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, during trial in Austin, Texas. AP

Alex Jones concedes Sandy Hook attack was '100% real’


  • English
  • Arabic

US conspiracy theorist Alex Jones said on Wednesday that he now understands it was irresponsible of him to declare the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre a hoax and that he now believes it was “100 per cent real”.

Speaking a day after the parents of a 6-year-old boy who was killed in the 2012 attack gave evidence about the suffering, death threats and harassment they have endured because of what Jones has trumpeted across his media platforms, the Infowars host told a Texas courtroom that he definitely thinks the attack happened.

“Especially since I’ve met the parents. It’s 100 per cent real,” Jones said at his trial to determine how much he and his media company, Free Speech Systems, owe for defaming Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis.

Their son, Jesse Lewis, was among the 20 pupils and six educators that were killed in the attack in Newtown, Connecticut — the deadliest school shooting in American history.

But Mr Heslin and Ms Lewis said on Tuesday that an apology would not suffice and that Jones needed to be held accountable for repeatedly spreading falsehoods about the attack. They are seeking at least $150 million.

Jones told the jury that any compensation above $2m “will sink us” but added: “I think it’s appropriate for whatever you decide that you want to do.”

Testimony concluded around midday and closing arguments were expected to begin on Wednesday afternoon.

Jones was the only person who gave evidence in his own defence. His lawyer asked him if he now understood it was “absolutely irresponsible” to push the false claims that the massacre did not happen and that no one died. Jones said he did.

Lawyer Mark Bankston went after Jones’s credibility, showing an Infowars video clip from last week in which a person claimed the trial was rigged and showed a photo of the judge in the case on fire.

Then came another clip of Jones asking if the jury was selected from a group of people “who don’t know what planet” they live on. Jones said he had not meant that part literally.

Mr Bankston said Jones had not complied with court orders to provide text message and emails for pretrial evidence gathering. Jones said: “I don’t use email”.

He was then shown a photo of an email from another source that featured his email address. He replied: “I must have dictated that.”

At one point, Mr Bankston informed Jones that his lawyers had mistakenly sent him two years’ worth of texts from Jones’s mobile phone.

Jones’s testimony came a day after Mr Heslin and Ms Lewis told the courtroom in Austin, where Jones and his companies are based, that he and his claims of a hoax had made their lives a “living hell” of death threats, online abuse and harassment.

Mr Heslin told the jury about cradling his son, who had a bullet hole through his head, and even described the extent of the damage to his body. A key segment of the case is a 2017 Infowars broadcast during which it was said Mr Heslin did not hold his son.

At stake in the trial is how much Jones will pay. The parents have asked the jury to award $150m in compensation for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The jury will then consider whether Jones and his company will pay punitive damages.

AP contributed to this report

The five pillars of Islam

1. Fasting

2. Prayer

3. Hajj

4. Shahada

5. Zakat 

Specs

Engine: Dual-motor all-wheel-drive electric

Range: Up to 610km

Power: 905hp

Torque: 985Nm

Price: From Dh439,000

Available: Now

What the law says

Micro-retirement is not a recognised concept or employment status under Federal Decree Law No. 33 of 2021 on the Regulation of Labour Relations (as amended) (UAE Labour Law). As such, it reflects a voluntary work-life balance practice, rather than a recognised legal employment category, according to Dilini Loku, senior associate for law firm Gateley Middle East.

“Some companies may offer formal sabbatical policies or career break programmes; however, beyond such arrangements, there is no automatic right or statutory entitlement to extended breaks,” she explains.

“Any leave taken beyond statutory entitlements, such as annual leave, is typically regarded as unpaid leave in accordance with Article 33 of the UAE Labour Law. While employees may legally take unpaid leave, such requests are subject to the employer’s discretion and require approval.”

If an employee resigns to pursue micro-retirement, the employment contract is terminated, and the employer is under no legal obligation to rehire the employee in the future unless specific contractual agreements are in place (such as return-to-work arrangements), which are generally uncommon, Ms Loku adds.

Updated: June 20, 2023, 10:53 AM