However, experts say neither bankruptcy nor an appeal of a Connecticut jury's findings on Wednesday are likely to save his personal fortune and media empire. Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has vowed to fight a nearly $1 billion defamation verdict against him.


For claiming they were actors who faked the tragedy as part of a government plot, a jury in Waterbury, Connecticut, state court found Jones and the parent company of his Infowars website must pay $965 million to numerous families of the 20 children and six staff members killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012.

When the judge chooses how much in punitive damages to award next month, the verdict could increase significantly. In a related case, a Texas jury awarded two Sandy Hook parents $49.3 million three months prior.

Jones has declared that he will appeal the judgment and use the recent bankruptcy of his business, Free Speech Systems LLC, as justification for not paying. Although it is uncertain whether he and his businesses will ever be able to pay the verdicts in full, the plaintiffs' lawyers have vowed to stop him from hiding any of his assets.

Chris Mattei, an attorney for the plaintiffs, stated, "We're confident we will recover as much of the verdict as we can in the near-term, and in the long-term, this verdict isn't going anywhere."

Although Infowars' finances are private, trial testimony indicates that between 2016 and 2018, the website earned at least $165 million in revenue. In the Texas case, an economist determined that Jones's net worth ranges from $135 million to $270 million.

In July, Free Speech Systems declared bankruptcy. The Sandy Hook families have gotten involved in the case and claim that Jones withdrew up to $62 million from Free Speech Systems while saddling it with $54 million in "fabricated" debt owed to another business that Jones and his parents owned.

According to Minor Myers, a professor at the UConn School of Law, bankruptcy courts have broad discretion to determine which creditors receive payment first and are vigilant in cases where businesses attempt to siphon off money using debt held by shell entities.

According to Myers, "No bankruptcy judge would permit Alex Jones and his father to stand in front of the plaintiffs."

'EGREGIOUS' CONDUCT



Along with other creditors whose debts are ranked in priority by the court, plaintiffs with judgments against bankrupt entities typically only recover a portion of what they are owed.

However, courts frequently decide that plaintiffs can pursue payment after the bankruptcy is over by pursuing wages and other assets for judgments involving intentionally causing harm.

According to Brian Kabateck, an attorney who was not involved in the case, Jones' "underlying conduct was egregious, and that's the kind of thing that could get you beyond the limits of a bankruptcy," according to Reuters.

According to several Connecticut lawyers, Jones is unlikely to succeed in the near future if he asks a judge or appeals court to lower the verdict on the grounds that it is excessive.

Connecticut does not have a cap on compensatory damages, in contrast to some states, and judges there rarely appeal jury verdicts because the bar for doing so is high, according to lawyer Mike D'Amico.

Although the verdict is shocking, it also includes more than a dozen plaintiffs who claim Jones' supporters harassed, threatened, and stalked them for years.

According to D'Amico, a billion-dollar verdict is appropriate given the case's particularly tragic circumstances and Jones' egregious behavior.

D'Amico remarked that the incident "involves conduct that is just so abhorrent" and was "a tragedy unspeakable in terms of its impact." This kind of honor is what you would anticipate.

By repeatedly disobeying court orders, asserting that the trial was a sham, and ranting against "liberals" while testifying, Jones may have also hurt his chances. Roy Gutterman, a professor at Syracuse University College of Law, asserted that Jones' "contempt for the system" will probably undermine any appeal.

It will be a big ask for the defendant to return to court and request that the sentence be reduced to something somewhat more reasonable. said Gutterman.