it's halloween, we're gonna to have a good time tonight. the bogeyman is coming. he's gonna get you. [ distant chatter ] gonna get you. [ screaming ] please help me! it's time to put the bogeyman to bed. [ screaming ] [ distant chatter ] bogeyman. he's gonna get you.

it's the top of the hour on cnn news room. it's good to have you. i'm victor blackwell. president biden just upkdated congress on what his administration sees as the biggest national security threat facing the country. in his new national security strategy, vladimir putin's invasion of ukraine is not the top political challenge according to biden. that distinction goes to china. russia was however at the heart of a key global meeting. there was a meeting with 50 other defense ministers on how to boost ukraine's air defense systems. ukraine is facing a third day of intensified air assault from russia which was condemned by the defense ministers for continuing to target civilian facilities. cnn's kaitlan collins is at the white house.

kaitlan, you're up first. let's begin with the president and his just released national security strategy. why is china above russia here? >> reporter: yeah, it might surprise some people given of course, russia's ongoing invasion of ukraine, but basically what this document gets into is what they think the biggest long-term threat is going to be, and in this document, president biden and his administration make the argument they think that that is overwhelmingly china, that they are going to be focused on outcompeting china because the argument they make when it comes to keeping russia in mind is that china is the only country they say that wants to fundamentally reshape the international order and has the diplomatic military technology aspects to do that. that potential to try to change and reshape that international order. of course, they do note many times russia is the biggest short-term threat gicven this ongoing invasion of ukraine and they actually delayed the publishing of this document. this is a national security strategy document that every new administration is required to

issue, but the biden administration's one was delayed because of that invasion of ukraine. it's got a 48-page document and basically jake sullivan who is the president's national security adviser laid out to reporters earlier talking about this saying what they wanted to highlight, how they were looking at how this invasion of ukraine has shaped things, and also how it's factored into what they rank these threats as and, you know, china, russia, democracy at home are the three priorities laid out in this document, and when it talks about russia and the difference when it talks about its invasion of ukraine and what china could potentially do, they say the russian invasion has displayed how maybe the military was not as fearsome as many once believed it was. they've suffered setback after setback on the battlefield, seen the way they've struggled with their strategy in ukraine, and i think that is also part of the factor here, and it goes back time and time again talking about outcompeting china, especially on the technological front and making sure that the united states is competing in that sense. something that you often hear from president biden, but

victor, i think one way they really summed up how they are viewing things is in this document as jake sullivan told reporters, they said the post-cold war era is definitively over. >> hm. kaitlan collins, appreciate that explanation. barbara, let me come to you on this defense ministers' meeting. secretary austin was there, the chairman of joint chiefs, chairman milley as well. what are the big takeaways? >> reporter: well, victor, they started today really just outside the nato parameters sitting down amongst themselves about 50 nations represented to talk about what to do next to offer ukraine critical weapons to push back against the russians. the ukrainians, very successful right now by all accounts with their counteroffensive, but over this week we have seen the russians launch a barrage of missiles and weapons at ukrainian civilian areas, and general mark milley, the u.s. chairman of the joint chiefs said deliberate killing of civilians is a war crime.

very tough language this morning in brussels. so now they are talking about what comes next, and what milley is laying out is a network of weapons and capabilities that can take ukraine forward, they hope, in the coming months and establish a much more long-term military capability against russia. listen to a little bit of what general milley had to say. >> a lot of the countries that were here today have a wide variety of systems, and the task would be to bring those together, get them deployed, get them trained because each of these systems is different, make sure that they could link together with a command and control of communication systems and make sure they have radars that can talk to each other so that they can acquire targets on the inbound flights. so it's quite complicated from a technical standpoint. it is achievable, and that's what we're aiming at. >> reporter: so air defense, getting the weapons into ukraine that can shoot down incoming russian missiles.

now a very top priority, short, medium, long range systems hopefully going to ukraine in the coming months. it's a top priority for the ukrainians. a lot of caution about giving them the longest range systems seeing as a potential escalation against russia, but the fundamental underlying point here is of course, to keep ukraine a free and sovereign country, and to have it be able to defend itself over the long-term so this does not happen again in europe so the russians don't get aggressive in their next steps towards eastern europe so nato and the u.s. would not have to step in yet again. victor? >> barbara starr, thank you. thank you, kaitlan collins as well. joining me now to discuss, steve hall. he's a former chief of russia operations for the cia, and cnn military analyst and retired air force colonel cedric layton. thank you for joining us. i hope you were able to hear

kaitlan's explanation from the white house on why china topped russia as the greatest national security threat, but considering that, we heard the armageddon talk of the last couple of days. are you surprised that china is above russia on this list? >> no, victor, i'm not. i think over the long-term which is what these strategic planning documents have a tendency to focus on, china is undoubtedly the much greater threat because it is a rising power with much more power, more capability than russia has. russia is a failing power. russia is a diminishing power. it's becoming more any diminish every day they continue to fight the ukrainiukrainians. when we talk about weapons, i think the focus is the primary risk on china is yet another emphasis that this administration has not -- does not believe that there is any indication yet that russia is interested in using nuclear

weapons because if there were strong indications of that, there might be a change in that national security document. >> yeah. colonel, these two challenges, russia and china are not happening completely separate from one another. obviously what happens in ukraine is potentially impacting what china does related to taiwan, but just draw the line for us of how one challenge influences the other as we now read over this document released by the white house. >> sure, victor. well, the basic idea here is that everything is interdependent and china and russia have established a very close relationship. of course, one can debate how close it actually is in the latest la latest iterations of it whereas china has moved from russia, but russia has used a lot of

chinese-made weapon systems and vice versa. the russians support a lot to the chinese as well, and the tactics that are being used, the chinese are watching very carefully what the russians are doing in ukraine and they could potentially use those same tactics and techniques in order to attack taiwan, and that's -- that's one of the big connections there. plus, this access if you will that has been formed between president xi and president putin of china and russia is one in which they have pitted themselves in essence against the united states and the other countries that want to protect and preserve the current international order. >> steve, i want to get your thoughts on this statement from the president in his interview with jake tapper in which he says putin's not irrational. he's just making some irrational statements. do you believe that putin is a rational actor? >> i think that putin is

probably a rational actor, but, you know, the definition of what a rational actor does and does not do in the west and the united states amongst our european allies is i think quite different than what a, you know, what the russians understand, and what vladimir putin understands to be rational, but yeah. he has not reached, you know, yet for the nuclear button. as a matter of fact his rhetoric has been a little bit less pointed recently on the nuclear side. he clearly knows that he's in trouble in ukraine, and he is doing i think what is a time honored russian military approach which is prepare more cannon fire for a long-term, long run, hopefully grinding war that he wants to pursue. so all of those are rational in the sense that they make sense if you are vladimir putin. they might not make sense to you or me, victor, but if you are vladimir putin, they make sense. >> and on saudi arabia, the president says there will be consequences.

there's a bill that's been introduced in the senate to pause arm sales to saudi arabia for a year in response to their cutting production of oil. opec plus the cut. they say that blumenthal who will introduce a corresponding ball in the house, they say this will rebalance the relationship. do you think that will rebalance the relationship pausing sales? >> it could potentially force the saudis even further into russia's arms, but there's a big caveat to that statement i just made because if russia's performance continues to be as bad as it has been so far in ukraine, the saudis might on their own rethink their relationship with the russians, but it's pretty clear that they've developed a very close relationship with putin, and they intend to move forward in that direction. so the risk for the united states is that we could lose a foothold in the middle east and that could have consequences for a lot of our operations throughout that part of the world. >> yeah. all right. colonel cedric leighton and

steve hall, thank you. a connecticut jury has now reached a verdict in the penalty phase of the defamation trial against alex jones and his company free speech systems. the judge already found jones liable for defamation and emotional distress of several members of the sandy hook shooting victims. jean ke sears joins us. >> reporter: as you said, it is all about the damages, the compensatory damages and general damages to make them whole as the judge told the jury for the misconduct that alex jones perpetrated upon them for so many years. the major focus of the plaintiffs' case was alex jones, his viewership which was in the millions, his radio show and how hours after the sandy hook massacre took place, that he started laying the groundwork saying that this was all the government's doing, that it was

fake, it was fraudulent, nobody died, but it was setting the stage so they would come and take your guns. well, that argument and that theory went from his radio show out to social media, and the bounds were virtually endless. the amount of viewership that alex jones through testimony, it was shown gathered after he started these lies absolutely multiplied as the weeks and the months and the years went on, and the prosecutor in their evidence showed that as of the end of september of this year that in his radio show, he said he had nothing to apologize, that he actually was the one that brought out and showed what was happening in all of this. so what they tried to show to garner the hurt, the damages that these people went through and they undertook was to show that it was neverending since 2012, and convictor, there's 15

plaintiffs, 14 families, and there's one current fbi officer who alex jones also said he was one of the first ones that went to the school. he also said that he was a fake, he was fraudulent, he was an actor. they were all actors, and this never, ever happened. >> so as we have learned in covering these cases that there are compensatory damages and punitive damages, we're not going to hear numbers for both of those today. >> very good point. set the expectation. compensatory really -- there is any limit. they can -- they have to be unanimous, but it can be any figure they want. the punitive according to connecticut law which is f fascinating because punitive damages are punishment damages. you're punishing someone for malicious behavior, wonanton behavior, but in connecticut that's only limited to attorney's fees. the jury doesn't know what the fees are, so they're supposed to simply mark yes or no.

punitive damages to be awarded to the plaintiffs, yes or no, and they just determined the briefing schedule and the argument, and so the attorneys alone in the next couple of weeks will come in and show what their attorneys' fees were, and they will hash out exactly how much money they should receive. the judge makes the final determina determination. >> that decision has been made, and we'll take a break and we'll bring that to everyone live. we'll take a quick break and be right back. works on that too, and lasts 12 hours. 12 hours?! who studies that long? mucinex dm relieves wet and dry coughs. my name is joshua florence, and one thing i learned being a firefighter is plan ahead. you don't know what you're getting into,

but at the end of the day, you know you have a team behind you that can help you. not having to worry about the future makes it possible to make the present as best as it can be for everybody. this is lily. when you see things differently, you can be the difference. ♪ capella university sees education differently. our flexpath learning format helps you control the pace and cost of your master's degree. the hiring process used to be the death of me. but with upwork... with upwork the hiring process is fast and flexible.

behold... all that talent! ♪ this is how we work now ♪ sometimes you're so busy taking care of everyone else you don't do enough for yourself, or your mouth. but eventually, it will remind you. when it does, aspen dental is here for you. we offer the custom dental treatments you need, all under one roof, right nearby. so we can bring more life to your smile... and more smile to your life... affordably. new patients without insurance can get a free complete exam and x-rays, and 20 percent off treatment plans. schedule your appointment today. it's the greatest sandwich roster ever assembled. next is the new great garlic. the tender rotisserie style chicken is sublime and the roasted garlic aioli adds a lovely pecan flavor. man, the second retirement really changed you. the new subway series. what's your pick? people remember ads with young people having a good time. so to help you remember that liberty mutual customizes your home insurance,

here's a pool party. ♪ good times. insurance! ♪ only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ what will you do? ♪ what will you change? ♪ will you make something better? ♪ will you create something entirely new? ♪ our dell technologies advisors provide you with the tools and expertise you need to do incredible things.

because we believe there's an innovator in all of us. we are following the breaking news out of connecticut. a jury has reached a decision in the penalty phase of the defamation trial against alex jones and his company free speech systems.

now jones was already found liable for defamation and emotional distress of several family members of the sandy hook shooting victims. also an fbi agent. we are expecting that decision tock a to be announced in the courtroom in just a few minutes. we will bring it to you live when it happens. and moving to the economy. economists and investors, president biden is now playing down some fears that a recession is likely in the near future. >> every six months they look down, every six months they see if it's going to happen. it hasn't happened yet. there is no guarantee that they're going to -- i don't think there will be a recession. if it is, it'll be a very slight recession. >> just this week, j.p. morgan's ceo warned a recession could be here in the next six to nine months as the fed aggressively raises interest rates in an attempt to tame inflation. in a new report out this morning, signals in their efforts to curb inflation may not be working as hoped.

raul solomon is with me now. so what does this new data show us? >> at a time when we look at any report for signs of a sustained downward trend in inflation, this was not that inflation increase. this was wholesale inflation and factory level inflation. prices still grew about .4%, but that is twice what economists were expecting over the last year. another way to think about it, producers are up 8.5%. the reason why this report is important is because it gives us a sense of what is to come in consumer prices. you don't want to see prices going up for producers because that tends to mean prices will go up for us consumers and you can see we had seen a few months where prices had declined, and so this was a reversal of that, right? this was not that. so moving forward, we're all looking for as the fed tries to tame inflation is are we in

store for a recession i? is it inevitable, and if so, what does that look like? when the president talks about a slight recession or j.p. morgan says we're going to see a recession, the question is how many people will lose their jobs? it's about 3.5%, and that is practically a 50-year low. bank of america said it could go up to 5.5%. folks are expected to lose their jobs, but the question is how many? >> rahel solomon, thank you. let's go to waterbury, connecticut. the decision has been reached against alex jones. the jury is coming back into the courtroom now. again, this is the penalty phase. a judge has already determined that jones and his company free

speech systems are liable for defamation and emotional dis distress. so we're going to hear their decision in just a moment. we have areva martin with us. jean casarez will be back in just a moment as well. ar areva, i'm going to come to you, but be prepared for me to cut you off if we start to hear from the judge or the jury. your expectations as by cwe com this moment? >> i expect there to be pretty large damages awarded by the jury. as you said, this isn't a question of liability. the judge has already determined a that alex jones is liable. it's how much would these families be paid for their pain and suffering for the emotional distress they experienced as a result of jones' vicious lies. >> let's go back into the courtroom. >> ladies and gentlemen of the jury, as your number is called, please answer here.

rise and remain standing. juror number 1. >> here. >> juror number 2. >> here. >> juror number 3. >> here. >> juror number 4. >> here. >> juror number 5. >> here. >> juror number 6. >> here. >> ladies and gentlemen of the jury in the case, have you agreed upon a verdict? >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> would you please pass the verdict to me? >> you can be seated .

>> just bear with me .

>> the judge is reviewing some of the documents from the jurors. i assume -- >> so i am going to send you back with just very minor instruction, and i'm sorry for this, but i just want to make sure that we cross all the ts and dot all the is and as i

pointed out, i had asked you -- you probably don't remember no because it was days ago to have the foreperson initial each page as well as sign. also i don't see any decimal points and that's fine. it's consistent throughout, so we can leave it at that. there's no decimal point, and that's fine, but i wanted to point that out. we will send the jury back in with that, and then when we're ready, we'll come back out. >> the judge is sending the jury back for as she said, crossing ts, dotting is, decimal points and initials on some of these documents, but the decision is in. i've got jean casarez with us now, and our legal analyst areva martin and joey jackson will join the conversation as well. walk us through what's happening at this moment. >> right now the foreperson is having to initial everything, and there are 15 plaintiffs.

14 family members as i told you, but the jury had to look at each and every person singularly to determine the amount of money damages for defamation and intentional infliction of stress which included the invasion of privacy aspect. so that is why they're -- it took so long because they had to look at each different situation. >> so there won't be one number that encompasses all 15. >> you could add them all up. >> for the first family, the second family, and it's going to take quite a long time to read. >> yes. >> alex jones is not in the courtroom today. >> no. >> do we know why? >> he doesn't want to be there. >> he doesn't have to be. >> he doesn't have to be. it's a civil case. he made it very apparent after his last press conference outside he was not going to be there, and his attorney on the record has said he has chosen not to be there. >> joey jackson, let's bring you into the conversation as well. we just watched this in texas a couple of months ago in august, and a jury determined the punitive and compensatory

damages about $50 million. what's the expectation here? you've got 15 families, one of them an fbi agent. >> yeah. i think the expectation are significant damages. when you are talking about decimal points, to me that's an indication that there's an award. piggybacking off of what jean said to respect what those are, relating to intentional infl infliction, relating to defamation, and there's another component i'm looking for, and that's the unfair business practice aspect of it. why? because that, victor unlike the others does not have a cap. when you look at compensatory damages just to explain what does that mean? it means damages that are designed to make you hold, and the punitive damages are to punish you, being alex jones. punitive damages are capped in connecticut at attorneys fees and litigation costs. the unfair trade practices are

uncapped. so the award there could be not only significant, but ruinous, and last point, you mentioned the texas issue. the texas one was in important in terms of the $39.3 million because those punitive damages were capped at 750 per plaintiff. you have with the victims of this family because there's no cap on the unfair business practice, that award as significant as it can be can really end the existence of alex jones' bankruptcy filings or not. >> joey makes such a fantastic point about the connecticut business parade fair practices. in this case, the compensatory damages are built in, and so it's not going to be a separate figure, but outside of the jury's presence, there is a punitive aspect. i know we're getting legalese here, but it has to do with the cuppa, and it's the judge who

will determine it at a later date, and that could be huge. there is no limit. >> we, of course, are watching that courtroom in connecticut. a decision has been made. the judge has sent the jury back for some initials and potentially some decimals. so this won't be very long. we will bring it to you as soon as we hear the decision from the jury on the damages for alex jones and his company due to these families because of his lies about the sandy hook shooting. unlike some others, neuriva plus is a multitasker supporting 6 key indicators of f brain health. to help keep me sharp. neuriva: think bibigger better luck next time. who said that? i did. but i haven't even thrown yet. you threw good money away when y bought those glasses. next time, goo america's best - where two pairs and a free exam start at just $79.95. it's a quality exam worth 59 bucks. can't beat that. can't beat this, either. alright, i'll give you that one. ... and, apparently, that one.

two pairs and a free exam starting at just $79.95. book an exam today at americasbest.com somebody sign this kid! (vo) get the new iphone 14 pro on us. right now t-mobile is including apple business essentials so you can easily manage your team's devices. on the network with more 5g coverage. only from t-mobile for business. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent.

these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. ♪ nobody can tell ya ♪ ♪ there's only one song worth singing ♪ ♪ they may try and sell ya ♪ baahh! ♪ 'cause it hangs them up ♪ ♪ to see someone like you ♪ ♪ but you gotta make your own kind of music ♪ life gets bigger when you break from the herd. ♪ sing your own special song ♪ the volkswagen tiguan. ♪ make your own kind of music ♪

what's for dinner? panera! freshly prepared with clean ingredients. it's not just a night off from cooking. it's a delicious night on... for everyone at the table. panera. only $1 delivery fee on our app. ♪ biofreeze. the number one clinician recommended menthol topical pain relief brand. works fast. lasts long. cool the pain with biofreeze.

as a teacher living and working in san francisco, the cost of housing makes living and working here really difficult. proposition d is the only measure that speeds up construction of affordable new homes by removing bureaucratic roadblocks. so teachers, nurses, firefighters and workers like us can live where we work. while prop e makes it nearly impossible to build more housing join habitat for humanity in rejecting prop e, and supporting prop d to build more affordable housing for everyone. now.

more on the breaking news now at waterbury, connecticut. the jury has re-entered the courtroom. you see here the bailiff handing over the documents to the judge. this is the defamation trial against alex jones' company free speech systems. this is the penaltied phase to determine damages due to 14 families and an fbi agent. the judge sent the jury back for a moment because some documents didn't have the foreperson's initials, and there were some decimals missing. so just a brief break. she's looking through those documents, and we're now of course, expecting to learn the

jury's decision. we've got with us jean casarez, joey jackson, areva martin. ar areva, the jury in texas determined that alex jones was liable for $50 million to families there. will these families ever recoup this money? >> that is such a great question, victor. whenever you file these civil lawsuits, the question is does the defendant have deep pockets? do they have the ability to pay? >> all right. let me go back into the courtroom, areva. >> the verdict, we the jury have reached our verdict as to damages in this case. we reward damages to each victim against alex jones and we see as follows. compensatory damages, instructions. fill in both numbers for each plaintiff and go to section 2. enter your assessments on the lines below.

to plaintiff robbie parker, defamation/slander damages, $60 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $60 million. total fair, just, and reasonable damages to plaintiff robert parker and against alex jones and free speech systems, line a and line b, a total of $120 million initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff david wheeler, deaf mission/slander damages $25 million. emotional distress damages past and future $30 million. the total of damages to plaintiff david wheeler and against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, $55 million, initialed

by juror 1. plaintiff francine wheeler, defamation/slander damages past and future, $24 million. the emotional distress damages, past and future, $30 million. total fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff francine wheeler and against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, total $54 million initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff jacqueline barter, defamation/slander damages past and future, $10 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $18,800,000. the total against alex jones and free speech jones is $28,800,000 initialed by juror 1.

to plaintiff mark barter, damages past and future, $25 million. to emotional distress damages past and future, $32,600,000. total fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff mark barden and against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, $57,600,000 initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff nicole hockley, slander damages past and future, $32 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $41,600,000. total fair, just and reasonable damages, against alex jones and free speech systems, $73,600,000. initialed by juror number 1.

to plaintiff ian hockley, defamation/slander damages past and future, $38 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $43,600,000. the total fair, just and reasonable damages against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, $81,600,000. jennifer hensel, defamation/slander damages past and future, $21 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $31 million. the total of fair just and reasonable damages to jennifer hensel at line a and line b, $52 million initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff donna soto,

defamation/slander damages $18 million, emotional distress damages past and future, $30 million. total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff donna soto and against alex jones and free speech systems, $48 million initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff carly soto parese, defamation/slander damages past and future, $30 million. emotional distress damages, past and future, $36 million. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff carly soto parisi at line a and line b, $66 million. to carlos matthew soto, defamation/slander damages past

and future, $18,600,000, emotional distress, $39 million. to plaintiff carlos matthew soto and against alex jones and free speech systems, $57,600,000, initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff jillian soto marino, a defamation/slander damages, $30 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $38,800,000. the total fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff jillian soto marino at line a and line b $68,800,000 initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff william almenberg,

slander $45 million. the emotional distress damages, $45 million. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff william aldinberg at line a and line b, $90 million, initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff erika lafferty, defamation/slander damages, $18 million. the emotional distress damages past and future, $58 million. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages, plaintiff erika lafr tferty and against a jones, $76 million initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff william sherrlack, the defamation/slander damages past and future, $9 million. the emotional distress damages, $27 million.

the total of fair, just and reasonable damages against alex jones and free speech systems, $39 million initialed by juror number 1. number to awarded fees and costs. the judge will determine the amount due to the plaintiffs for reasonable attorneys fees and costs and they'll then award the plaintiffs that amount at a later date. check no if not. we the jury find that the charge for the assessments and costs have been met. yes is checked to be awarded by the judge at a later date, initialed by juror number 1. the last page is the foreperson juror number 1's signature and the date of 10/12/2022.

>> the verdict may be accepted and recorded. >> ladies and gentlemen of the jury please listen to your verdict as it has been accepted and recorded. >> do you need that? >> no. verdict, we the jury verdict as in this case. we've awarded damages to each plaintiff against alex jones and free speech systems. number one, compensatory damages, instructions filled in both numbers by the plaintiff. please enter your damages assessments for each plaintiff on the line below. to plaintiff robert parker, defamation/slander damages past and future, $60 million. emotional distress damages, $60 million. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff robert parker and against alex jones and free speech systems,

$120 million. initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff david wheeler, defamation/slander damages past and future, $25 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $30 million. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff david wheeler and against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, $55 million initialed by juror number 1. to francine wheeler, defamation/slander damages past and future, $24 million. b, emotional distress damages past and future, $30 million. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff francine wheeler against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, $54 million initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff jacqueline barden,

defamation/slander damages, $10 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $18,800,000. the fair just and reasonable damages of jacqueline barden against alex jones and free speech systems, at line a and line b, $28,800,000 initialed by juror 1. to mark barden, defamation/slander damages past and future, $25 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $32,600,000. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages for plaintiff mark barden and against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, $57,600,000, initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff nicole hockley, defamation/slander damages, past and future, $32 million. emotional distress damages past

and future, $41,600,000. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff nicole hockley and against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b, $73,600,000, initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff ian hockley, a defamation/slander damages past and future, $38 million. b, emotional distress damages past and future, $43,600,000. the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff ian hockley and against alex jones and free speech systems at line a and line b is $81,600,000, initialed by juror number 1. to plaintiff jennifer hensel, a, defamation/slander damages past and future, $21 million. b, emotional distress damages past and future, $31 million.

the total of fair, just and reasonable damages to jennifer hensel add line a and line b, $52 million defamation/slander damages past and future, $18 million. emotional distress damages past and future, $30 million. total fail, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff donna soto and against alex jones and free speech systems, $48 million. initialled by juror number one. to plaintiff carly soto parici, defamation/slander damages, $30 million. emotional distress damages, past and future, $36 million. total fair, just and reasonable daniels, to plaintiff and

against alex jones, $66 million. initialledled by juror one. to carlos silva, 18,600,000, emotional distress, $39 million, total, fair just and reasonable damages, $57,600,000. initialled by juror number one. to plaintiff jillian marino, $30 million, emotional distress damages past and future, 38 mil38, 8

800, 000. 68,800,000. to plaintiff william aldenberg, $45 million. emotional distress damages, past and future, $45 million. total fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff william aldenberg and against alex jones and free speech system, $90 million. initialled by juror number one. to plaintiff erica lafferty, defamation/slander damages, $18 million. emotional distress damages, past and future, $58 million. total fair, just and reasonable daniels to plaintiff erica lafferty and against alex jones and free speech system, $76 million. initialled by juror number one. to plaintiff william sherlack,

$9 million. emotional distress damages, past and future, $27 million. total fair, just and reasonable damages to plaintiff and against alex jones and free speech systems, $36 million, initialled by juror number one. number two, award of attorneys fees and costs. instructions, check yes or no. check yes the judge will determine the amount to the plaintiff for reasonable attorney fees and costs and will award the plaintiffs that amount at a later date. check no, the judge will reward $1 to the plaintiff for the costs. we the jury find the standard charge for the assessment of attorney fees and costs has been met, yes is checked. reasonable attorneys fees and costs to be awarded by judge at a later date. initialled by juror number one. last page is juror number one's

signature and a date 10/12/2022 and is initialled by juror number one. ladies and gentlemen of the jury, do you agree this is your verdict? >> yes. >> yes. >> thank you. >> anything further before i discharge the jury? >> nothing from the defense, judge. >> all right. as you will recall when we started the case, i read some preliminary instructions to you. i now have a brief. i promise you, a brief statement to read to you regarding communications. you have concluded your service as jurors and jurors often ask whether they can discuss their jury experience with others. under our law, that decision remains solely with each one of you. if you wish to discuss your jury service with others when you are asked about it or even if you are not asked about it, you may do so. on the other hand, if you choose not to discuss your jury service

with others, you may refuse to do so. the choice is yours. it is your right to decide whether to speak or not speak about your experience. you may be contacted by members of the media seeking comment from you about your experience in this case. you are under no obligation to speak to the media, nor do you need to provide any explanation for not doing so. as you know, highly publicized trials may arouse strong reactions in the public. for this reason and others, you may wish not to publicize your service as a juror. that decision is entirely your own. now i can deviate from the script. on a personal note, i would like to thank you all for your service and your dedication and serving on this jury, for taking time out of your busy lives. i hope that you found the experience a rewarding one. i thank you for your service on behalf of the parties, the

lawyer and the court. you are hereby formally discharged from your service as jurors. thank you again. we are adjourned. >> $965 million that jury of six decided. that's the liability for alex jones and his company to those 14 families and the fbi agent who responded to sandy hook that day. let's bring back the panel. we have jean, joey, reva. 965. >> this speaks volumes to the state of mind of the jury. for about four weeks of trial, they heard from those parents, they testified what they went through, not only the death of their child but in the aftermath what they went through. i want to mention one father here, robbie parker, his daughter was in first grade. she was killed. she was massacred. robbie parker got more than

anyone else, $120 million all together. his story, as he testified, was it was hours after emily was shot dead that he participated in a press conference. he was nervous. and he smiled a little bit. there was a little bit of a smile, maybe even a small laugh, that he does that when he gets nervous. that was enough, according to testimony, that alex jones took that and ran with it. he disseminated the photo of robbie parker everywhere, for years, to show it was fake, to show he was a fake actor. you see every single plaintiff the jury looked at individually. $120 million they felt he was due for what he had gone through, from almost the very, very beginning. >> listen, before we started going into the reading of the decision there, i asked if the families will get that money. i think we have an answer now that we know $965 million.

as i was writing them down, how much does that matter? i saw a man crying. i can't imagine that was about a dollar figure. >> yeah, victor, as i was saying, the issue always in civil cases is, is it collectible? is it collectible? what we know from alex jones is that there was a determination in that texas case that he was worth about $270 million. we know he transferred about $62 million out of his accounts. he transferred property to his wife. he filed chapter 11 bankruptcy. he is saying he doesn't have money. for families that -- this is not about money. there's no amount of money that can make these families whole. the pain and suffering that they have experienced because of the vicious lies and the vile statements alex jones has made can't make these families whole. what we have in our civil system are money damages.

i hope the families, lawyers very skilled attorneys, will be able to pierce any veil that alex jones or his companies try to put up to prevent these families from collecting some of this money. doubtful that he has $900 plus million. but he's not broke. i hope these families, if they don't collect a dime, that they put him out of business and they prevent him from ever doing this to any other family or group of families who have experienced the pain that these families have experienced. >> joey jackson? >> my thoughts are as follows. you want to talk about accountability? there are consequences in lying, in spreads misrepresentations that impair and affect families. jean mentioned the nervous laughter which translated saying, that's what it was. it wasn't about a hoax. there was another family who had to describe their son's grave being urinated on.

people wanting to dig him out to establish he wasn't really dead. when you talk about falsehoods that impair people, that emotionally destroy people, who to live through this for almost ten years, i think that resonated with this jury and with the number figures we have here, not only to deter him but other people in the future who would spread such lies and profit. unacceptable, that's what the jury said. >> we had the video -- i saw a man crying. i'm told that's robbie parker. the story you just told. >> i think the emotions -- that's him right there. i think the emotions of those families sitting there tell it all. one other thing is, many of the families moved out of connecticut. >> they had to get away from the people who were -- >> their new addresses were disseminated. >> thank you all. "the lead" starts now. >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. welcome