I'm not a lawyer but I don't get what's going on here: is it normal for a judge to dismiss the case in the middle of deliberations? Why let it go to the jury at all if you're going to overrule the case? And, according to the link above, the judge is going to let the jury decide but they're not sequestered so they'll surely know their opinion is meaningless.
According to Legal Insurrection, the jury had been requesting transcripts of testimony, notably from Ross Douthat who emailed James Bennet to tell him his editorial was wrong. Take that as you will, but it sure sounds to me like they were considering the "reckless disregard" aspect before the judge short-circuited the whole process.
Well, there you have it folks. You can print any kind of lie you like but just make sure you send a late-night email expressing concern and you're off the hook.
3 comments:
HILARIOUS FAILURE
Old Gray Lady 100, Cray-Cray Lady 0
Feb. 10: "And as she continued to press this point, suggesting that The Times had a history of lying about her, the judge in the case, Jed S. Rakoff, asked her to be more specific. Ms. Palin replied, 'I don’t have the specific articles in front of me.'”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDjERJ04oTE
Unanimous decision against Palin from the jury. Who did NOT learn about the judge's ruling to toss the pathetic case until today.
Two losing verdicts in one trial. Impressive!
Post a Comment