Panama City, Florida – The jurors are A high-stakes defamation trial This lawsuit against CNN saved some of the reporter's toughest questions about her aggressive pursuit of the plaintiff in the case, U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young.
Young said CNN smeared him in a report by correspondent Alex Marquardt that first aired on “The Read with Jake Tapper” in November 2021, and that he was in despair trying to flee Afghanistan. The lawsuit alleges that the company had illegally profited from people who Biden administration's This suggests that he was involved in “black market” trading and ruined his professional reputation as a result.
Intelligence and national security correspondent Katie Beau Lillis, who worked with Marquardt on this story, was peppered with questions about her actions in the intense effort to bring Young to CNN.
Written questions submitted by the jury were read out to Lillis by Judge William Henry.
CNN defamation trial: Judge scolds CNN's lead lawyer and orders plaintiff to apologize: “This is not a kindergarten.''
CNN correspondent Katie Beau Lillis was grilled during juror questioning over her conduct with US Navy veteran Zachary Young during a high-stakes defamation trial. (Fox News Digital/Law and Crime)
“Do you think Americans have an obligation to talk to you? [or] CNN?'' Henry read out the first question.
“No, no one is obligated to tell us,” Lilith answered. “It is their free decision whether they choose or not.”
“How many people have to talk to you in order not to talk to you? How many people have to talk to you in order not to talk to you?” The judge asked the following questions: was read aloud.
“That's a really good question,” Lilith responded, amused.
CNN defamation trial: network's integrity chief defends controversial report at litigation center
After a long pause, Lillis told jurors that she had a responsibility not just to “the people in the story,” but “to the American people, to the American taxpayers, especially when you're writing about government operations.” spoke.
“In this case, we had someone who may have been profiting from a truly devastating and tragic situation in Afghanistan by exploiting the misfortune of others. My priority is rather to seek answers from Mr. Young. I felt like I should keep going, rather than leave searching for answers here,” said Lilith. “Because in this case, I was thinking about Afghans who were trying to leave the country. And I was thinking about a lot of military personnel and former government agents and CIA personnel and officials that I knew. I knew who this was for.'' This idea that there are people who are left behind is very personal and very painful. ”
Zachary Young, a U.S. Navy veteran, told Lillis he would only speak if she guaranteed that he would not be identified in any media reports. (Jessica Costescu)
Lillis was then asked, “When do you accept someone who doesn't want to speak or comment?” She responded, “It depends,” adding that digging into Young's activities was a “higher priority.”
The same juror then asked a follow-up question: “If they express displeasure or avoid questions, do they lose this right?” Mr. Lillis stressed that anyone had the “right” not to talk to her, and that Mr. Young initially contacted her as a potential client, but only after receiving a notification that Mr. Lillis had viewed his LinkedIn profile. I pointed out that it was after I received it.
“He could have stopped answering my questions. He could have stopped engaging completely. He did none of that. He kept talking to me. ” Lillis told the jury.
CNN defamation trial: Reporter grills veteran for involvement that was downplayed by defense
One juror mentioned an exchange between Ms. Lillis and Ms. Young, who did not want to be identified in the press, and said that by speaking off the record, Ms. Lillis “gave them a chance to understand what we were working on.” You'll get it,'' he said. Insist that your name not be used. ”
“The opportunity to plead not to reveal your name is the same as being guilty until proven innocent,” the juror wrote, read out by Judge Henry. “Could you clarify how your approach is actually the opposite, innocent until proven guilty?”
“Well, first of all, we are not a court,” Lilith replied. “Similar to the criteria for knowing whether someone's actions are newsworthy, whether or not something becomes a news story is not whether it is illegal or not. The question is whether we should reveal our sexuality.'' The misery of Afghans “We had enough evidence in the form of these text messages, essentially, to suggest that we had reason to ask these questions, so we continued to ask them, but… You know, if the claim had been made that there was more here, we would have backed out, right?”
“I didn't have an answer,” Judge Henry said with a laugh, before moving on to the next question. “Given this fresh perspective, do you understand that the way you do things might scare someone?” He clarified that this was a follow-up to the previous question.
One juror said CNN's Katie Beau Lillis sent a message to Navy veteran Zachary Young about why he shouldn't be reported, saying it was “proving his innocence.'' It is tantamount to being guilty.” (Fox News Digital/Law and Crime)
Lillis acknowledged the theory that someone “might be intimidated by being approached by a reporter,” but given that Young had publicly advertised his services on LinkedIn and messaged her first, , refuted that idea in this case.
“Does anyone have an obligation to talk to you if you feel vulnerable people are being taken advantage of?” asked another juror, and Lillis reiterated that no one was “obligated” to talk to her. Ta.
“Do people have the right not to have their names listed in news articles?” one juror asked, leaving a CNN reporter confused.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
After thinking for a while, Lillis said she was struggling with the word “right.”
“It is the responsibility of news organizations and reporters like myself to think carefully about whether the acts and people we are exposing are newsworthy and whether it is in the public interest to know. 'I believe this is happening or this designated individual is carrying out it,' Lillis said. “And in this case, we feel strongly that that hurdle has been met.”
The jury's final question concerned their judgment of Young when he silenced or blocked potential clients when he learned they could not afford to hire him, saying, “What is the proper way to break off an engagement?” What do you think?” he asked. Ms Lillis responded that “simply 'there's nothing I can do about it'” would probably be an appropriate response, adding that Young's actions “seemed a little harsh to me”.
The trial is scheduled to resume Thursday and be livestreamed. fox news digital.
