Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
In another sign of absolute social decay, the civil court system has begun issuing insane and moronic judgements that can obviously never be paid.
Alex Jones was hit with a billion dollar judgement, and I’ve heard that some other political dissidents have been hit with ridiculous and obviously unpayable judgements.
Firstly, a judgement is supposed to reflect damages. Secondly, it is supposed to be payable. What these civil judgements do is effectively give people life sentences to work as indentured servants, which is clearly a constitutional violation.
No slut got $1.2 billion in damage because someone posted a nude video of her, and no random dude has $1.2 billion to pay her (the guy is black, by the way – the woman is a “Jane Doe” because she’s a sex victim). This is just not serious. It is purposefully cartoonish in nature, intended to make a mockery of the justice system itself.
If the woman wasn’t a Jane Doe, the defense probably could have presented evidence that she is already doing OnlyFans, because basically every woman does that.
A Harris County court awarded a woman $1.2 billion in a lawsuit she filed against an ex-boyfriend who posted sexually explicit images of her online, KHOU 11’s Anayeli Ruiz reported.
The Katy woman, identified as Jane Doe in court documents obtained by KHOU 11, accused Marques Jackson of “revenge-porn conduct” and years of harassment, including spying on her using home security cameras and impersonating her online. “It’s been about two years or three years. It’s been painful and scary,” Jane Doe said.
Per court documents filed in April 2022, the couple began dating around 2016 before moving to Chicago together so Jackson could pursue a job opportunity there. They had a “long and drawn out break up starting in early 2020 before the COVID-19 pandemic” and officially ended the relationship around October 2021.
Jackson allegedly kept “intimate visual material” from their time together and even logged into Jane Doe’s mother’s home surveillance system to spy on her after she moved back to Harris County. He also allegedly stole money from her bank account and interfered with a loan application.
Bradford J. Gilde, Jane Doe’s attorney, claimed in the suit that Jackson’s behavior escalated when he became “delusional and paranoid” that Jane Doe was having a relationship with a mutual friend. Per court documents, Jackson posted images of Jane Doe on a pornographic site, a publicly accessible Dropbox folder, and various social media pages where he impersonated her. He sent links to Jane Doe’s friends, family, and colleagues and contacted her directly from fake phone numbers.
Please note that if he actually stole money from her, that would be a criminal offense, which he was never prosecuted for. This is “supporting evidence” that the person is bad and has bad intentions.
This case, and this judgement, was about the nude video he posted on the internet.
The court system and the media constantly does this – they list off other alleged bad behavior in describing the case, but don’t make it clear that this information, though presented in court, was not the thing that is being punished.
I remember that during the January 6 prosecutions, this behavior of the court system and media made it so a person could walk away from reading an article thinking that it was a crime to believe in QAnon.
They would say “the man who entered the Capitol was also a believer in QAnon conspiracy theories,” as if that was part of what he was being charged with, rather than evidence entered by the prosecutor to prove malicious intent for the actual charges, which were related to “disrupting an official proceeding.”
“You will spend the rest of your life trying and failing to wipe yourself off the internet. Everyone you ever meet will hear the story and go looking. … Happy Hunting,” he stated to her, as cited in court documents.
…
Gilde and his co-counsel, Jacob Schiffer, said that although it’s not likely Jane Doe will ever receive the full $1.2 billion she’s owed, they’re pleased with the verdict. “It was about sending a message to the world,” Schiffer said. “Do not mess with Texas and do not mess with Texas women.”
The justice system is not supposed to be “sending messages.” That is what a lynching is supposed to do. The justice system is supposed to dispense justice. (Granted, you do have “broken window theory” and so on, which does to an extent involve punishment that is in a way intended to send a message, but it isn’t cartoonish punishment, as the terms exist in real life.)
This woman did not lose a billion dollars because he posted her nudes, and she did not spend a billion dollars on therapy. A billion dollars is not in the man’s capacity. At some point they are going to start saying “order to pay a zillion dollar,s” and these Jew lawyers will say “it’s not real, it’s just a symbol.”
It just shows how illiterate Americans are on the basic nature of the legal system that they would go along with this.
Frankly, this whole “revenge porn” thing is a bizarre Black Mirror type thing. It sort of makes sense on its face, maybe, but if you are a woman and you agree to be filmed nude, you should be aware that this could potentially end up on the internet when you eventually decide to screw the guy over.
It’s immoral to post nudes of your ex-girlfriend on the internet. But there are a lot of things that are immoral, and you cannot legislate this sort of interpersonal behavior. You just end up with weird tyranny.
Also, let’s be real: this is just more feminism, a way to empower women. A man being able to say “I’ll post that shit on the internet” gives him some advantage over a woman, and the reason these laws exist is that in our culture, men are never allowed to have any ability to push back on a woman.
