As jury deliberates in Palin v. NYT, Judge Rakoff is considering NYT’s motion for judgment in its favor. He signaled Friday he wouldn’t buy paper’s argument that the editorial only referred to Palin’s PAC and not to her.
He just signaled he is chilly to argument that the editorial isn’t actionable because it wasn’t literally false. Judge: 'You can also argue that Cinccinnati should have won the superbowl, but perhaps that won’t be an adequate argument.’
Still on the table, Rakoff says, is whether a reasonable juror could find by clear and convincing evidence that NYT/Bennet acted with reckless disgregard of the truth, by not clicking on a hyperlink that led to ABC article which said no link between Palin group & Ariz. shooting.
There’s also Q of research Bennet was sent, forwarded on and said he must have looked at which also said there was no indication that Tucson shooter Loughner was inspired by Palin group map, or politics at all. Palin lawyer Turkel dwelled on that in closing by judge hasn’t yet.
Palin lawyer Shane Vogt picks up on Rakoff suggestion that tying someone to murder is so serious that normal rule not requiring any investigation falls away.
Vogt: ‘When you’re making such a strong assertion like that, there is a duty to investigate that arises because of seriousness of the charge that you’re making.’ He says he thinks there is caselaw but doesn’t immediately offer any cites.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
