Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Empty Wheel)   Alex Jones' Lawyer actually sent over an entire hard drive of finding out   (emptywheel.net) divider line
    More: Giggity, Lawyer, attorney Andino Reynal, Alex Jones, Mr. Reynal, medical records, plaintiff's lawyer, court's earlier order, defense lawyer  
•       •       •

7132 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Aug 2022 at 6:30 PM (9 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



132 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-08-05 4:03:02 PM  
I may need to seek medical attention for my schadenfreude boner
 
2022-08-05 4:21:30 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-05 4:22:51 PM  
"intimate messages with Roger Stone"

There aren't enough nope GIFs in existence for this.
 
2022-08-05 4:25:39 PM  
Gig-ity, indeed
 
2022-08-05 4:43:43 PM  
Beginning to wonder if there's a correlation between having found out and having caught sayof.
 
2022-08-05 4:48:40 PM  
So, Uh... Mr Reynal is about to be an ex-lawyer?
 
2022-08-05 4:58:18 PM  

hobnail: [Fark user image 686x361]


To be fair "Alex Jone's" could be a screw-up of "Alex Jones' ". Probably not. But it's a possibility.
 
2022-08-05 5:01:08 PM  

Thoreny: hobnail: [Fark user image 686x361]

To be fair "Alex Jone's" could be a screw-up of "Alex Jones' ". Probably not. But it's a possibility.


It's not even close.  It's missing the letters Q, L, and Z.
 
2022-08-05 5:17:59 PM  

markie_farkie: Thoreny: hobnail: [Fark user image 686x361]

To be fair "Alex Jone's" could be a screw-up of "Alex Jones' ". Probably not. But it's a possibility.

It's not even close.  It's missing the letters Q, L, and Z.


He's not even Welsh
 
2022-08-05 5:19:07 PM  

Thoreny: hobnail: [Fark user image 686x361]

To be fair "Alex Jone's" could be a screw-up of "Alex Jones' ". Probably not. But it's a possibility.


That screenshot was for theteacher's benefit, not subby's.
 
2022-08-05 5:24:30 PM  
text messages of a six month period between August of 2019 and the first quarter of 2020

text messages of a six month period between August of 2019 and the first quarter of 2020

text messages of a six month period between August of 2019 and the first quarter of 2020
 
2022-08-05 5:26:43 PM  

hobnail: Thoreny: hobnail: [Fark user image 686x361]

To be fair "Alex Jone's" could be a screw-up of "Alex Jones' ". Probably not. But it's a possibility.

That screenshot was for theteacher's benefit, not subby's.


Well I quoted the wrong person. On purpose. Because I skipped over his comment and didn't read it.
 
2022-08-05 5:38:48 PM  

Thoreny: hobnail: [Fark user image 686x361]

To be fair "Alex Jone's" could be a screw-up of "Alex Jones". Probably not. But it's a possibility.


I spell Alex Jones 'Baloney Golem, Nutritional Suppository Huckster Veiny Volcacanoface', but that's just me.  ;)
 
2022-08-05 6:23:20 PM  

vudukungfu: Gig-ity, indeed


I, too, thought the tag offered something really good to byte into!  :D
 
2022-08-05 6:36:00 PM  
Publish it all. Put it in the public domain so Jones can't change his story in a memoir. I know people can't profit from crimes for which they've been convicted, but I'm not sure that holds with a civil judgment.
 
2022-08-05 6:36:22 PM  
On one hand, I was sad to discover that Texas law actually limits the punitive damages in this case to $750k, regardless of what the jury awards.  On the other hand, the utter fail of his lawyers in this regard makes me think it's all worth it anyway.

Also, there are two other trials still pending (IIRC).  He isn't gonna get off easy.
 
2022-08-05 6:37:39 PM  
Can you sue your lawyer when they accidentally turn over so much information that it gets you a congressional subpoena?
 
2022-08-05 6:38:05 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-05 6:39:40 PM  
I thought we already knew this? Waiting for the DOJ to...*voice trails off*

Does a prosecutor who receives such information have a legal duty to run it up the flag pole?
 
2022-08-05 6:40:25 PM  

Ragin' Asian: Publish it all. Put it in the public domain so Jones can't change his story in a memoir. I know people can't profit from crimes for which they've been convicted, but I'm not sure that holds with a civil judgment.


OJ wrote a book, still hasn't paid the Goldman family.
 
2022-08-05 6:40:36 PM  

cretinbob: I may need to seek medical attention for my schadenfreude boner


Call your doctor if it doesn't last more than four hours.
 
2022-08-05 6:40:51 PM  

uknesvuinng: On one hand, I was sad to discover that Texas law actually limits the punitive damages in this case to $750k, regardless of what the jury awards.  On the other hand, the utter fail of his lawyers in this regard makes me think it's all worth it anyway.

Also, there are two other trials still pending (IIRC).  He isn't gonna get off easy.


And Bankston (the plaintiff lawyer) has already said he's willing to challenge the constitutionality of the damages cap.
 
2022-08-05 6:40:56 PM  

Ragin' Asian: Publish it all. Put it in the public domain so Jones can't change his story in a memoir. I know people can't profit from crimes for which they've been convicted, but I'm not sure that holds with a civil judgment.


Yes, please.
 
2022-08-05 6:42:06 PM  
Sounds like he accidentally the whole thing.
It's mind-bending incompetence. Like they were so strung out on whatever drugs they're on, or meds they're off, they couldn't do the most basic functions of their profession especially given that this isn't even the first time they had farked up and had to "claw back" incriminating evidence.
Absolutely incredible.
 
2022-08-05 6:43:17 PM  

studebaker hoch: cretinbob: I may need to seek medical attention for my schadenfreude boner

Call your doctor if it doesn't last more than four hours.


No man, take more.

My johnson is 10 inches long.
 
2022-08-05 6:43:40 PM  

Kitty2.0: Ragin' Asian: Publish it all. Put it in the public domain so Jones can't change his story in a memoir. I know people can't profit from crimes for which they've been convicted, but I'm not sure that holds with a civil judgment.

OJ wrote a book, still hasn't paid the Goldman family.


Not much royalties to be made from a .pdf file.
 
2022-08-05 6:43:50 PM  

mithras_angel: uknesvuinng: On one hand, I was sad to discover that Texas law actually limits the punitive damages in this case to $750k, regardless of what the jury awards.  On the other hand, the utter fail of his lawyers in this regard makes me think it's all worth it anyway.

Also, there are two other trials still pending (IIRC).  He isn't gonna get off easy.

And Bankston (the plaintiff lawyer) has already said he's willing to challenge the constitutionality of the damages cap.


In the other thread on the verdict, I read where the cap (in Texas) can be ignored if it is shown that the defendants tried to hide or destroy evidence. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT'S BEEN THE CASE HERE. Also, IANAL.
 
2022-08-05 6:44:36 PM  

mithras_angel: uknesvuinng: On one hand, I was sad to discover that Texas law actually limits the punitive damages in this case to $750k, regardless of what the jury awards.  On the other hand, the utter fail of his lawyers in this regard makes me think it's all worth it anyway.

Also, there are two other trials still pending (IIRC).  He isn't gonna get off easy.

And Bankston (the plaintiff lawyer) has already said he's willing to challenge the constitutionality of the damages cap.


Good. I am not sure if any other state has enacted such a limit on punitive damages.
 
2022-08-05 6:44:47 PM  
Well guess Jones should have spent some of that money he was hiding on better lawyers.
 
2022-08-05 6:45:39 PM  

wildcardjack: Can you sue your lawyer when they accidentally turn over so much information that it gets you a congressional subpoena?


Jones could file a malpractice case against Reynal.  But he would have to prove that "but for" this mistake (massive as it was), he would have won the case.  Or at least gotten a significantly better result.
 
2022-08-05 6:45:50 PM  
"Reynal's legal assistant sent a file transfer link to Bankston"

I assume they're urgently brushing up their resume.
 
2022-08-05 6:47:14 PM  

roofmonkey: Sounds like he accidentally the whole thing.
It's mind-bending incompetence. Like they were so strung out on whatever drugs they're on, or meds they're off, they couldn't do the most basic functions of their profession especially given that this isn't even the first time they had farked up and had to "claw back" incriminating evidence.
Absolutely incredible.


I like to think one unappreciated paralegal has been sabotaging Jones, but never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
 
2022-08-05 6:47:28 PM  

common sense is an oxymoron: "intimate messages with Roger Stone"

There aren't enough nope GIFs in existence for this.


Ever seen a guy with two Dicks on his back?
 
2022-08-05 6:47:31 PM  

Melvin Lovecraft: mithras_angel: uknesvuinng: On one hand, I was sad to discover that Texas law actually limits the punitive damages in this case to $750k, regardless of what the jury awards.  On the other hand, the utter fail of his lawyers in this regard makes me think it's all worth it anyway.

Also, there are two other trials still pending (IIRC).  He isn't gonna get off easy.

And Bankston (the plaintiff lawyer) has already said he's willing to challenge the constitutionality of the damages cap.

In the other thread on the verdict, I read where the cap (in Texas) can be ignored if it is shown that the defendants tried to hide or destroy evidence. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT'S BEEN THE CASE HERE. Also, IANAL.


I am beginning to think that Reynal intentionally bent Alex Jones over and told him to bite the pillow because he was coming in dry, because he knew his "defense" was farked from day one.
 
2022-08-05 6:47:34 PM  

mithras_angel: wildcardjack: Can you sue your lawyer when they accidentally turn over so much information that it gets you a congressional subpoena?

Jones could file a malpractice case against Reynal.  But he would have to prove that "but for" this mistake (massive as it was), he would have won the case.  Or at least gotten a significantly better result.


Which is gonna be an uphill battle for several reasons, including that he'd already lost the case and the evidence raised in the courtroom was all stuff that should have been turned over a year ago.
 
2022-08-05 6:48:23 PM  

Ragin' Asian: Publish it all. Put it in the public domain so Jones can't change his story in a memoir. I know people can't profit from crimes for which they've been convicted, but I'm not sure that holds with a civil judgment.


Have someone read the important shiat into the congressional record
 
2022-08-05 6:48:26 PM  
Like everyone on the internet, I'm going to throw my guess into what happened.

The lawyer uses Office365 and has all of their files uploaded into OneDrive.  The contents of the phone backup was also uploaded there since it's their practice to share content from there with the other attorneys.

The paralegal/assistant was asked to share the file with the plantiff and instead of sharing the specific file, they accidentally shared the entire OneDrive.  This gave them access to all of the lawyer's files.  The plaintiff told the defense that they did that and the defense said all of the content should be deleted.

But the rules of evidence don't allow you to play takesies backsies on all the content they send over, just specific files that you claim privilege or confidentiality over.  The attourney was lazy and instead of submitting every filename they shouldn't have access to, to comply with the rules, they decided instead to just say delete it all which the plaintiff didn't need to follow.
 
2022-08-05 6:48:51 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size



"Told you guys, I m a ninja badass.
He is NOT"
 
2022-08-05 6:49:10 PM  

ClavellBCMI: mithras_angel: uknesvuinng: On one hand, I was sad to discover that Texas law actually limits the punitive damages in this case to $750k, regardless of what the jury awards.  On the other hand, the utter fail of his lawyers in this regard makes me think it's all worth it anyway.

Also, there are two other trials still pending (IIRC).  He isn't gonna get off easy.

And Bankston (the plaintiff lawyer) has already said he's willing to challenge the constitutionality of the damages cap.

Good. I am not sure if any other state has enacted such a limit on punitive damages.


I think other states have limits, but none as tiny.

Also, the constitutionality of it has been tried before, in the 20 year history of the law, and failed each time.

But perhaps this is the case that makes the Texas appellate court go "ok, maybe that is too low".
 
2022-08-05 6:49:17 PM  

Target Builder: "Reynal's legal assistant sent a file transfer link to Bankston"

I assume they're urgently brushing up their resume.


And changing their legal name, moving to another state, getting a new phone number and email, selling their car, etc.
 
2022-08-05 6:49:41 PM  

UNC_Samurai: common sense is an oxymoron: "intimate messages with Roger Stone"

There aren't enough nope GIFs in existence for this.

Ever seen a guy with two Dicks on his back?


Gwar, 94.
But no.
 
2022-08-05 6:52:27 PM  

common sense is an oxymoron: "intimate messages with Roger Stone"

There aren't enough nope GIFs in existence for this.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-05 6:52:36 PM  

ProfessorTerguson: studebaker hoch: cretinbob: I may need to seek medical attention for my schadenfreude boner

Call your doctor if it doesn't last more than four hours.

No man, take more.

My johnson is 10 inches long.


I see we purchased the same phrasebook. Yes, you can smoke on the patio.

My hovercraft is full of eels!
 
2022-08-05 6:53:02 PM  
There's gotta be info on that hard drive about Hunter Biden's laptop!
 
2022-08-05 6:53:09 PM  

UNC_Samurai: common sense is an oxymoron: "intimate messages with Roger Stone"

There aren't enough nope GIFs in existence for this.

Ever seen a guy with two Dicks on his back?


Bad, so bad.
 
2022-08-05 6:55:14 PM  

hobnail: [Fark user image 686x361]


Got anything more recent? What do actual modern linguists think about it?
 
2022-08-05 6:55:21 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-05 6:55:29 PM  

Beerguy: common sense is an oxymoron: "intimate messages with Roger Stone"

There aren't enough nope GIFs in existence for this.

[Fark user image 682x285]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-05 6:56:46 PM  
Law and Alex, Alex Jones 🎶
Alex Jones Alex Jones Alex Jones 🎶
They got a thing goin' on 🎶
He gotta be extra careful 🎶
We can't afford to build his hopes up too high 🎶
🎶
 
2022-08-05 6:57:31 PM  

DJ-Pyro: Like everyone on the internet, I'm going to throw my guess into what happened.

The lawyer uses Office365 and has all of their files uploaded into OneDrive.  The contents of the phone backup was also uploaded there since it's their practice to share content from there with the other attorneys.

The paralegal/assistant was asked to share the file with the plantiff and instead of sharing the specific file, they accidentally shared the entire OneDrive.  This gave them access to all of the lawyer's files.  The plaintiff told the defense that they did that and the defense said all of the content should be deleted.

But the rules of evidence don't allow you to play takesies backsies on all the content they send over, just specific files that you claim privilege or confidentiality over.  The attourney was lazy and instead of submitting every filename they shouldn't have access to, to comply with the rules, they decided instead to just say delete it all which the plaintiff didn't need to follow.



I don't think you're far off here, on how it happened that the data was shared.  That sort of mis-click is amazingly easy.

For the procedure stuff afterwards, you seem to be 100% correct.

The Texas law code says you have to specifically list what should be clawed back, and why (privilege reason) that should occur.

It doesn't look like you could claw back stuff that would have been non-responsive to subpoenas / depositions, but then that stuff probably wouldn't help the OC's case.  But, because it's now out there, it could help other people's cases.

E.g., "Hey, you know in that case where Jones said he didn't have anything responsive in CT?  Yeah, he lied."
 
Displayed 50 of 132 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


X
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.