This browser does not support the Video element.
InfoWars employees continue testifying on fourth day of Alex Jones defamation trial
Today, the jury heard from InfoWars employees and an expert on journalistic ethics.
AUSTIN, Texas - A judge ruled months ago that Infowars founder Alex Jones defamed victims’ families by saying the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax.
In day four of his defamation damages trial, Owen Shroyer, another host on Infowars, took the stand. "Infowars’ mission is an open platform to tell the truth and also be an open platform for others to tell the truth or how they see things," he said.
Jones' defense attorney F. Andino Reynal referred to an earlier exhibit, a video report with Megyn Kelly doing a 17-minute special report on Alex Jones and Infowars, which Jones' defense believes painted him in a negative light.
"When you watched that news segment did it appear edited to you?," said Reynal.
"The editing was done so that what Alex Jones said in the piece was not in linear fashion," said Shroyer.
Editing came up again in the cross-examination. "Do you see at all the irony of you sitting in that chair after the court found that what you did was defamatory and claim that Megyn Kelly clip was too edited?" said attorney Kyle Farrar.
"No," said Shroyer.
RELATED COVERAGE
- InfoWars producer, host take the stand in Alex Jones defamation trial
- Alex Jones Sandy Hook defamation trial: InfoWars employee testifies on second day
- Alex Jones Sandy Hook defamation trial continues
Next, the plaintiffs brought forward former employee Robert Jacobson, who testified via video deposition. He says he felt guilty even being an Infowars employee for 13 years. "I felt terrible for what happened even though I myself know I wasn't directly involved," said Jacobson.
Later the attorney for the families brought forward their expert witness, Fred Zipp, who specializes in journalism and ethics. They asked if what he watched on Infowars abided by journalistic standards.
"Mr. Jones primarily and some other personalities as well repeatedly published misleading or outright false information," said Zipp.
The defense challenged that definition of a journalist in cross-examination. "In our nation we have a long tradition of people who sit in front of microphones and free associate and talk about what is going on, isn't that true?" said Reynal.
"I think so," said Zipp.
"There is nothing wrong with that right?" said Reynal.
"So long as the ranting is not injuring people," said Zipp.
More witnesses are expected to take the stand next week.