Inner City Press





In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYTAzerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .



These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis
,



Share |   

Follow on TWITTER

Home -

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis

CONTRIBUTE

(FP Twitterati 100, 2013)

ICP on YouTube

More: InnerCityPro

BloggingHeads.tv
Sept 24, 2013

UN: Sri Lanka

VoA: NYCLU

FOIA Finds  

Google, Asked at UN About Censorship, Moved to Censor the Questioner, Sources Say, Blaming UN - Update - Editorial

Support this work by buying this book

Click on cover for secure site orders

also includes "Toxic Credit in the Global Inner City"
 

 

 


Community
Reinvestment

Bank Beat

Freedom of Information
 

How to Contact Us



In NYT Defamation Trial Sarah Palin Lawyers Grills Cohn About Kathy Griffin and the Head

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - The Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Feb 8 – In the case of Sarah Palin versus New York Times and James Bennet, on July 24, 2020 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Jed S. Rakoff held oral arguments. Inner City Press live tweeted them - and now the 2022 trial, below.

 On August 28, 2020 Judge Rakoff issued an order denying summary judgment and finding, inter alia, that "there "there is sufficient evidence to allow a rational finder of fact to find actual malice [by NYT / Bennet] by clear & convincing evidence." So, trial. Inner City Press will cover it - having previously reported Judge Rakoff jokingly perhaps offering that time slot to a criminal case and saying, Ms. Palin may just have to wait.

It was set to start on January 24, 2022. But as tweeted by Inner City Press, "Sarah Palin v. NYT will NOT start today. Palin has tested positive for COVID three times. Judge Rakoff says she can return for trial on February 3, unless she is showing symptoms."

 On February 3 the trial started. Inner City Press live tweeted it, thread here.

 On February 7, after this song things proceeded, with Inner City Press live tweeting, thread here.

 On February 8, questioning of the NYT's Ms. Cohn continued; Inner City Press live tweeted, thread here:

now Sarah Palin v. NYT trial continues  @SDNYLIVE , with Judge Jed S. Rakoff hearing argument before the jury comes in. Palin's lawyers have argued for punitive damages overnight

Judge Rakoff: Last I remember, the party offering evidence has the burden to show it is relevant. You and your able colleagues seem to be arguing that if there is anything helpful to your case and Mr. Bennet denies seeing it, it's admissible. That's ridiculous. Inner City Press @innercitypress ·

 Judge Rakoff: At another break, during his testimony, I will allow you to put some foundational questions to him outside the presence of the jury. If you can establish more than you have so far, I will reconsider. Inner City Press @innercitypress ·

Now witness is back on the stand, about grafs and blurbs. Q:  Ms. Cohn I want to ask you again about the conversations throughout the day. There were such communications throughout the day, correct? Objection! Judge Rakoff: Sustained. Inner City Press @innercitypress ·

 Q: Throughout the day were you speaking with members of your team about the editorial, America's Lethal Politics?

Cohn: Yes. Nick Fox might have stepped into my office at some point and mentioned he had a conversation with Elizabeth Williamson about the piece. Inner City Press @innercitypress ·

 Q: Do you recall going to Mr. Bennet's office and saying, We need to talk? Cohn: Yes, that was after I'd actually read the draft. I asked, Where are we going with this? I felt unsure. I felt he needed to take a look and weigh in. Inner City Press @innercitypress ·

 Q: At 4:09 pm, you say "I'll pick up Elizabeth," right? Cohn: Yes. Q: Beyond Nick Fox, who was involved? Cohn: Bob Semple.

Q: Is this the back-field directory? Cohn: Yes. Palin's counsel: We offer Exhibit 148. NYT counsel: No objection. Judge Rakoff: Admitted. Inner City Press @innercitypress ·

 Q: So, here you wrote, Are there signs of mental illness? Or is it just that anyone who commits a mass shooting is deranged. Why? Cohn: It's just something for me to remember. I want to think about this. But anyone could comment on it. Inner City Press @innercitypress ·

 Cohn: I was trying to think of a political figure on the left who was inciting violence. All I could think of was the comedian Kathy Griffin holding Trump's head.

Palin's lawyer: May I approach the witness? With a copy of her deposition? Judge Rakoff: Yes. Cohn: I was thinking about the period of time, early Tea Party, when the discourse was coarsening and people began to view opponents as enemies to be hated.

Palin's lawyer: Do you recognize 140-F, Ms. Cohn?

Cohn: I don't see my name... Oh, now I do.

Then Cohn on re-cross said that the New York Times has a policy, even in making a correction, of not "repeating the error" and that's why the correction did not mention or apologize to Palin

 Early on February 8, Palin's lawyers put in a memo on their entitlement to punitive damages: "At the February 7, 2022 Charging Conference, Defendants suggested certain changes to the Court’s proposed jury instruction on punitive damages based on Morsette v. “The Final Call,” 309 A.D.2d 249, 254 (1st Dep’t 2003). Specifically, Defendants claim Plaintiff is only entitled to punitive damages if she proves that the Defendants’ “sole motivation in publishing the challenged statements was hostility toward and a desire to injure the plaintiff.” See Defendants’ Proposed Revisions to Instruction No. 17 (provided at the Feb. 22nd Charging Conference). Defendants’ proposed revision improperly seeks to limit the grounds upon which Plaintiff can prove her entitlement to punitive damages and flies in the face of well-established law. As recognized by the Second Circuit in DiBella v. Hopkins, 403 F.3d 102, 122 (2d Cir. 2005), “[u]nder New York law, punitive damages in a defamation case are justified “‘to punish a person for outrageous conduct which is malicious, wanton, reckless, or in willful disregard for another's rights.’” (quoting Prozeralik, 82 N.Y.2d at 479–80) (emphasis added); see also Celle v. Filipino Reporter Enterprises Inc., 209 F.3d 163 (2d Cir. 2000) (“all of the relevant circumstances surrounding the dispute” should be considered in establishing entitlement to punitive damages)."



  Back on January 19 the New York Times filed its proposed questions for jurors, including "do any of you believe that the New York Times has a bias against certain political parties or issues?"Also, do you know Ross Douthat? Andrew Sullivan? Robert Semple?

On January 20, Sarah Palin's lawyers filed their proposed questions, including "Have you followed any recent high profile court cases closely?" Can you say, Ghislaine Maxwell? We'll be there.

On January 17 - MLK Day - the New York Times filed a request that juror before opening statements be read a statement including that "Plaintiff claims that two statements in the Editorial falsely communicated to readers that she directly caused Jared Loughner to shoot people in Arizona in 2011." Then, the cross-hairs. Watch this site.

On January 11, Judge Rakoff convened a pre-trial session. Inner City Press live tweeted it here.

 The case is Palin v. The New York Times Company, 17-cv-4853-JSR (Rakoff)

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

sdny

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540



Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2020 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for