CNN defamation trial: Jurors ask brutal questions about reporter's aggressive pursuit of Navy veterans

Panama City, Florida – The jurors are High stakes libel trial CNN's objections have saved some of the toughest questions for the reporter as she aggressively pursues the plaintiff in the case, U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young.

Yang claims that CNN defamed him in a November 2021 report by reporter Alex Marquardt, which first aired on “The Leadership of Jake Tapper,” suggesting that he Illegally profiting from desperate people trying to flee Afghanistan after the events in Afghanistan. Biden administration's Withdrawal, suggesting he was involved in “black market” dealings and ruining his professional reputation.

Katie Bo Lillis, the intelligence and national security reporter who worked with Marquardt on the story, faced many questions about her conduct in her zealous efforts to get Yang engaged with CNN.

Questions submitted by jurors in written form were read aloud to Lillis by Judge William Henry.

CNN defamation trial: Judge scolds CNN chief lawyer, orders accuser to apologize: 'This is not kindergarten'

CNN reporter Katie Bo Lillis' conduct with U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young was criticized by a jury in the network's high-stakes defamation trial Question. (Fox News Digital/Law & Crime)

“Do you think Americans have an obligation to talk to you (or) CNN?” Henry read the first question.

“No, no one is obligated to speak to us,” Lilith replied. “It's their free decision to choose or not to choose.”

“How far do they have to go to stop talking to you? Do they have to talk to you to stop talking to you?” the judge read the next question.

“That's a very good question,” Lilith replied amusingly.

CNN defamation trial: Online fairness chief defends controversial reporting at center of lawsuit

After a long pause, Lillis told jurors she had a responsibility “to the people in the story” and to “the American public, the American taxpayers, especially when I write about government activity.”

“This is a case in which one of our own may be profiting from the suffering of others in the catastrophic and tragic situation in Afghanistan. I feel my first priority is to continue to push Mr. Yang for answers and not to give up here.” Looking for answers,” Lillis said. “Because in this case, I'm thinking of Afghans who are trying to leave the country. I'm thinking of the many, many service members and former agency officials, CIA officials, officials I know. There are people who are going to be left behind, and that's This thought is very personal and very painful.”

Zachary Young, a U.S. Navy veteran, told Lilith that he would only talk to her if she promised not to identify him in any reports. (Jessica Costescu)

Lillis was then asked “when do you accept someone who doesn't want to speak or comment?” to which she responded “it depends a lot on the situation”, adding that she had “higher priorities” to come Delve deeper into Yang's activities.

The juror then asked, “Do they lose that right by expressing discomfort or avoiding questions?” Lillis stressed that anyone has a “right” not to speak to her, but noted that Young initially identified her as Potential prospects contacted him, but that was after he received notification that Lilith viewed his LinkedIn profile.

“He could have stopped answering any of my questions. He could have completely disengaged. He did nothing. He continued to talk to me,” Lillis told jurors.

CNN libel trial: Reporters aggressively go after Navy veterans as Defense Department downplays involvement

One juror pointed to an exchange between Lilith and Young, who asked not to be named in any report, when she told him that speaking privately would give him “an opportunity to understand what we're doing… and understand what we're doing.” “. Make your case and don't let your name appear in it. “

“The opportunity to have your name not mentioned makes it sound like you are guilty until proven innocent,” the juror wrote, which Judge Henry read aloud. “Can you clarify that what you're doing is actually the opposite, innocent until proven guilty?”

“Well, first of all, you know, we're not a court,” Lillis responded. “Just like you know the criteria for whether someone's behavior is newsworthy, whether it ends up in a news article is not whether it's illegal. In this case, you know, whether someone should be exposed for potentially profiting from Afghanistan “Human suffering,” adding, “We have enough corroboration in the form of these text messages to basically show that we have reason to ask these questions, so we continue to ask them, but, you know, if there's a reason to say there's still. More, then we would back off, does that answer the question?”

“No answer,” Judge Henry said with a smile, before moving on to the next question, “Given this fresh perspective, can you understand that your approach might scare someone?” He clarified that this was a follow-up question to the previous question. .

A juror faulted CNN's Katie Bo Lillis for sending a message to Navy veteran Zachary Young about why he shouldn't cover him The information in the case “is akin to guilt until proven innocent.” (Fox News Digital/Law & Crime)

Lillis acknowledged that it was hypothetical that someone “might feel intimidated by being approached by a reporter,” but he dismissed that notion in this case because Young publicly advertised his services on LinkedIn and he messaged her first.

“If you feel a vulnerable person is being taken advantage of, does anyone have an obligation to talk to you?” asked another juror, to which Lilith responded that no one had an “obligation” to talk to her.

“Do people have the right to remain anonymous in news reports?” one juror asked, stumping a CNN reporter.

Click here to get the Fox News app

After thinking for a moment, Lilith said that it was difficult for her to understand the word “correct”.

“I think news organizations and journalists like me have a responsibility to carefully consider whether the behavior we are exposing and the people we are naming is newsworthy and in the public interest. This behavior is occurring or this designated person is the person who committed it. kind of behavior,” Lillis said. “In this case, I feel strongly that that standard has been met.”

The final juror question involved her judgment of Young's tendency to remain silent or block a potential client once he learned he didn't have the financial means to hire him, asking “What do you think is the appropriate way to disengage?” Lilith responded. , “A simple 'There's nothing I can do about it'” might have been an appropriate response, adding that what Young did “seems a little harsh to me.”

The trial will resume on Thursday and will be broadcast live fox news numbers.