Sarah Palin

The verdict came a day after the judge said he planned to dismiss the case, ruling that Ms. Palin's legal team had failed to prove that the newspaper ...

The New York Times has prevailed in defending itself against a defamation lawsuit brought by Sarah Palin after jurors found she had not proven her case.

Bennet testified that he added language about there being a clear link and that once he realized his error, he worked to quickly issue a correction.Palin testified she was "mortified" that the Times falsely accused her of inciting the murder of those six people, which included a federal judge and a 9-year-old girl, six years after that deadly shooting.Bennet testified that he was surprised that some people interpreted the editorial as saying the man who shot Giffords and others was incited by Palin, testifying "that is not the message we intended to send." "It is gratifying that the jury and the judge understood the legal protections for the news media and our vital role in American society. Palin sued the Times and its former editorial page editor James Bennet in 2017 after they published an editorial that erroneously linked a map that Palin's political action committee had posted to a shooting in 2011 that killed six and injured former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.The editorial in question was published on the day of the shooting at a baseball practice that injured Congressman Steve Scalise. It was meant to address heated political rhetoric ahead of the shooting, but in making its point, the Times erroneously said that there was a "clear" link between a map that had crosshairs over congressional districts, including Giffords', and the shooting that injured her. My job was to decide the law," Rakoff said.Palin did not prove "actual malice," the judge said, which is the standard her legal team had to meet in her defamation case. The jury of nine, which had been deliberating since Friday afternoon, found the Times not liable for defamation against Palin.Unbeknownst to them, during deliberations, Judge Jed Rakoff ruled that Palin's attorneys did not prove a key element of their case, and that he would set aside the jury's verdict should it have found for Palin.After the jury delivered its unanimous verdict Tuesday, Judge Rakoff briefly told jurors about his decision to dismiss the case and said he and the jurors both came to the same decision." Jury finds that Sarah Palin failed to prove her defamation case against the New York TimesJury finds New York Times not liable in Palin caseHere's why some people STILL believe the Earth is flatExperts say Putin is losing the 'propaganda war'Sole independant Russian TV channel says they are still on air ... for nowRussian state TV is covering the war very differently Melinda French Gates opens up about her divorce: 'I couldn't trust what we had'Fox anchor says the Covid-19 vaccine saved his lifeJury finds New York Times not liable in Palin caseUkrainian journalist explains how they are staying on the air during warRussian news anchor: Millions of Russians feel this is a catastropheHow the invasion is testing Russia's propaganda machine'I know the truth': CNN asks Russians what they think about Putin's warHere's why some people STILL believe the Earth is flatExperts say Putin is losing the 'propaganda war'Sole independant Russian TV channel says they are still on air ... for nowRussian state TV is covering the war very differently Melinda French Gates opens up about her divorce: 'I couldn't trust what we had'Fox anchor says the Covid-19 vaccine saved his lifeJury finds New York Times not liable in Palin caseUkrainian journalist explains how they are staying on the air during warRussian news anchor: Millions of Russians feel this is a catastropheHow the invasion is testing Russia's propaganda machine'I know the truth': CNN asks Russians what they think about Putin's warThe New York Times has prevailed in defending itself against a defamation lawsuit brought by Sarah Palin after jurors found she had not proven her case.

The jury will continue to deliberate. The judge indicated that he believed an appeal was likely, and his decision was intended to avoid any complications ...

Judge Jed S. Rakoff said he would allow the jurors to continue weighing the arguments by both sides. The jury was still deliberating behind closed doors in a Lower Manhattan courthouse, adding an unexpected and unusual twist in a case that is a major test of the First Amendment protections that journalists work under.

A federal judge announced Monday afternoon that he would dismiss former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, ...

The Times argued Palin had not met the standards for actual malice. As the end of the trial neared, Palin's attorneys, Shane Vogt and Kenneth Turkel, increasingly ramped up the severity of their claims against the newspaper, saying it accused her of inciting murder. The two sides clashed over what had become of Palin's life after she faded from the national political scene. Bennet testified that standards editors believed to apologize routinely would cheapen the nature of an apology, though he seemed personally to disagree: he tweeted out an apology from the Times opinion section's account the next morning, although he did not use Palin's name. Palin's attorney's also argued that Bennet's failure to research those claims explicitly should not get him or the Times off the hook. Bennet sought a swift denouncement of both the ready availability of guns and inflammatory political rhetoric. But it is in keeping, media lawyers say, with a raft of lawsuits against major news sites, including NPR, many of which carry an ideological element. Hanging over the case were questions of language, intent and the lapses that occurred under deadline pressure. A directed verdict is one in which the judge says there's only one verdict to reach. The trial represented a dramatic confrontation between the self-professed hockey mom from Wasilla, Alaska, and one of the nation's most august news outlets. The four-and-a-half year process led to the trial that wrapped up closing arguments on Friday. "Ms. Palin was subjected to an ultimately unsupported and very serious allegation that Mr. Bennet chose to revisit seven years or so after the underlying events," Rakoff said.

A U.S. jury on Tuesday ruled against Sarah Palin in her libel lawsuit accusing the New York Times of defaming her in a 2017 editorial that incorrectly ...

I decided the law." Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com "You decided the facts. read more Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

It was a one-two punch for Sarah Palin: The verdict came a day after the presiding judge said he would dismiss the case because Palin's lawyers failed to ...

"It is true that there has been a great decrease of both civil and criminal jury trials," Rakoff said. Despite contentions by Palin's attorneys that the paper had caused harm and had acted out of ideological animus, they did not provide any tangible evidence of such claims. The editorial also wrongly suggested that the crosshairs had been placed over the lawmakers' images. In the trial's early stages, Rakoff had also concluded that Palin's team had failed to make a sufficient evidentiary case of actual malice against the Times and its former editorial page editor, James Bennet. He dismissed the case then, too. He said Palin had failed to make a sufficient argument that the Times had acted with actual malice to let the case be determined by a jury. And now, the jury's verdict for the Times arrays even steeper odds against Palin's success.