Starting soon:
A telephone conference in Roy Moore's defamation lawsuit against comedian and prankster Sacha Baron Cohen, over a segment of Showtime's "Who Is America" testing a supposed pedophile detector on the ex-judge.
Covering it for @CourthouseNews.
A telephone conference in Roy Moore's defamation lawsuit against comedian and prankster Sacha Baron Cohen, over a segment of Showtime's "Who Is America" testing a supposed pedophile detector on the ex-judge.
Covering it for @CourthouseNews.
If you missed the segment, the "Borat" actor tests the device.
It beeps on Moore.
Moore was not amused.
Segment:
Background on the suit via @BBuchman_CNS courthousenews.com/roy-moore-sues…
It beeps on Moore.
Moore was not amused.
Segment:
Background on the suit via @BBuchman_CNS courthousenews.com/roy-moore-sues…
On the line now:
U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter
Moore's lawyer Larry Klayman
Cohen and the network's attorneys:
Elizabeth A. McNamara, Eric J. Feder, and Rachel F. Strom from the firm Davis Wright Tremaine
U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter
Moore's lawyer Larry Klayman
Cohen and the network's attorneys:
Elizabeth A. McNamara, Eric J. Feder, and Rachel F. Strom from the firm Davis Wright Tremaine
Judge Carter says outright he is inclined to allow a broader discovery and allow depositions to go forward, which the networks opposed.
Larry Klayman is up first.
Larry Klayman is up first.
Klayman calls Sacha Baron Cohen "someone who is very talented in his own right, but he is a master of deception."
For Cohen and the networks, McNamara is now up:
"If we were to proceed with full discovery... then we would need to be getting discovery on any and all issues and claims here, including substantial truth."
She means truth of the allegations by the women.
"If we were to proceed with full discovery... then we would need to be getting discovery on any and all issues and claims here, including substantial truth."
She means truth of the allegations by the women.
McNamara on the court's inclination for broader discovery:
"There would need to be full discovery on substantial truth. There would need to be full discovery on actual malice."
"There would need to be full discovery on substantial truth. There would need to be full discovery on actual malice."
McNamara wanted to bifurcate the discovery because the broader approach is a larger ordeal, and she wrote in a pretrial briefing that the First Amendment issues are strong enough that the case does not need to go there.
Judge Carter: "If we're going to have discovery, it seems to me we should have just all of the discovery," including the network's First Amendment defense and Moore's fraud allegations.
McNamara:
"There hasn't been any articulation on the First Amendment arguments," adding she was hoping to have some sort of determination there.
But she adds she will comply with the court's order.
"There hasn't been any articulation on the First Amendment arguments," adding she was hoping to have some sort of determination there.
But she adds she will comply with the court's order.
Judge Carter asks how much time they need:
Klayman wants 150 days for discovery.
McNamara calls that "exceedingly optimistic," because they are going to have to look into the women's claims and other issues.
She wants six months. Klayman agrees.
Klayman wants 150 days for discovery.
McNamara calls that "exceedingly optimistic," because they are going to have to look into the women's claims and other issues.
She wants six months. Klayman agrees.
Judge Carter sets a discovery deadline of Feb. 2.
"Let's try to wrap up discovery by Groundhog Day then," the judge says.
Adjourned. Story soon.
"Let's try to wrap up discovery by Groundhog Day then," the judge says.
Adjourned. Story soon.
