Sounds like maybe the only research you did was listen to what the convicted liar is saying.

The reality is that Jones was given ample opportunity to comply and blatantly refused to cooperate with lawful court orders. Add to that, some of that information that he claimed under oath didn't exist, was accidentally sent to the plaintiff's attorneys by Jone's attorneys in a subsequent trial thus providing proof that said information was being withheld purposefully.

In other words, this is exactly what justice looks like.

Is he guilty or liable for damages? This wasn't a criminal trial, it was a civil trial, or maybe I'm wrong...

It was a civil trial. So convicted isn't the correct word, but found to be a liar by the court, nonetheless.

> The Judge overseeing the Alex Jones case declared him guilty herself, skipping the Jury trial, by claiming that he didn't provide evidence of his financials. . Jones on air claims he submitted it twice, but each time the judge told him it wasn't in the correct format. On the second submission, the Judge didn't give him an opportunity to fix it, instead she found him guilty by default, skipping the Jury trial and going straight to the penalty phase.

That's a nice story. Here's are the actual default judgement orders in the two Travis County cases. The current case is the Pozner case, where he never provided documentation, not the case where he eventually supplied limited at incomplete documentation.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21074211-alex-jones-...

Serial con artist doing con artist things, or malfeasance from the judge who has been extraordinarily patient with lies under oath, grandstanding, and dealing with someone with the morality of a carnivorous weevil.

What is frightening is you seem to be a true believer, how can a public figure so easily debunked enthrall you so easily?