By Larry Neumeister, Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) – A jury concluded Tuesday that the New York Times had not broadcast the former governess of Alaska Sarah Palin for an error in a 2017 editorial which, she said, damaged its reputation.
The jury deliberated a little more than two hours before returning its verdict after the Palin lawyers and the newspaper presented closing arguments during a civil trial of the Federal Court of Manhattan which is in its second week.
Palin testified on Monday that death threats against her increased and that her senses had taken place after an editorial on armed violence said that his political action committee had contributed to political rhetoric which had enabled an atmosphere of violence.
The Times corrected the article less than 2 p.m. after its publication.
Kenneth Turkel, lawyer for Palin, urged the jury to find the Times responsible for the defamation on the grounds that his former editor -in -editor of the editorial page, James Bennet, knew that what he published was wrong or act with a “reckless contempt” for the truth.
He told the jury that he should grant compensatory damages to Palin for his reputation and private mental anxiety, adding that they should “find a figure and let it end to this thing”.
“To date, there has been no responsibility,” he said. “This is why we are here.”
He told the jurors not to be deceived by Palin’s “bouncing” personality on the stands stand.
“She doesn’t cry much,” said Turkel. “It can be an honest mistake. For her, it has changed their life.”
Palin, who graduated from a journalist at the university, continued the Times for damages not specified in 2017, about a decade after having burst into the national scene as a nominated of republican vice-president.
His trial stems from an editorial on firearms published after the American representative Steve Scalie, a republican of Louisiana, was injured in 2017 when a man with a history of anti-gop activity opened fire in a Congress baseball team in Washington.
In the editorial, the Times wrote that before the mass shooting of 2011 in Arizona which seriously injured the former American representative Gabby Giffords and killed six others, the Palin’s political action committee had contributed to an atmosphere of violence by circulating a map of electoral districts which put Giffords and 19 other democrats under stylized reticlations.
In a correction, the Times said that the editorial had “wrongly indicated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting” and that it had “badly described” the card.
A tear Bennet apologized to the Palin of the witness’s position when he testified last week, saying that he was tormented by error and worked urgently to correct him after the readers complained to the newspaper.
Felicia Ellsworth, Times lawyer, said the jury could not find the newspaper or Bennet responsible because he should conclude that the error was intentionally published by the publishers who knew it was bad.
“There was not a lesser evidence showing something other than an honest error,” she said.
Ellsworth said Bennet and Times “corrected the strong record, clearly and quickly” once the error has been discovered.
The lawyer pointed out that several times the publishers have testified in a coherent way on the effort to correct the error and the importance they gave to accuracy while Palin’s assertions were “supported by nothing other than it says”.
And she noted that the status of Palin as a public figure meant that the jury should find “malice” to find in his favor.
“For Governor Palin, this is only another opportunity to take false news. For James Bennet, the truth counts,” said Ellsworth.
In February 2022, judge Jed S. Rakoff rejected Palin’s complaints in a decision published while a deliberate jury. The judge then let the jurors pronounce their verdict, which also went against the palin.
The trial occurs after the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals of the US in Manhattan restored the case last year.
The Court of Appeal declared that Rakoff’s dismissal decision had badly accumulated the work of the jury. He also cited the defects of the trial, claiming that there was an erroneous exclusion of evidence, an inaccurate investigation of the jury and an erroneous answer to a question of the jury.
Originally published:
California Daily Newspapers
