Defamation Trial Not Going Well for CNN

Have you heard about this case? A US veteran named Zachary Young is suing CNN for defamation over a 2021 news segment which he claims ruined his reputation and made it impossible for him to get new business.

The Young case concerns a segment that first aired on Jake Tapper’s program on Nov. 11, 2021, about extraction efforts in Afghanistan. Young had built a business helping such efforts, and advertised his services on LinkedIn to sponsors with funding who could pay for such evacuation.

He subsequently helped four separate organizations — Audible, Bloomberg, a charity called H.E.R.O. Inc. and a Berlin-based NGO called CivilFleet Support eV — get more than a dozen people out of Afghanistan, according to court papers. He said he did not market to — or take money from — individual Afghans.

Yet Young’s picture was shown as part of CNN story that talked about a “black market” where Afghans were charged $10,000 or more to get family members out of danger.

Five months after the clip aired, Young complained and CNN issued a clarification that he was not involved in any black market. Nevertheless, he sued and when CNN asked a judge to dismiss his case, the judge refused. Yyoung is seeking $1 billion in damages.

Fox News reported yesterday that corporate types at CNN are worried because the trial could potentially lead to a big payout at a time when CNN can ill afford it.

“It’s a big concern of upper management,” a CNN insider told Fox News Digital. “All the damning stuff, text messages, etc., has already been published. So I don’t think there’s concern in terms of exposure. But I think there’s definitely concern about the outcome. It seems very likely that CNN is going to have an enormous payout at the end of this.”

Also yesterday, the Washington Free Beacon painted a picture of a trial where the attorney for CNN (whose name is David Axelrod) didn’t seem to be connecting with the jury.

During much of Axelrod’s combative cross-examination on Thursday, the jury largely didn’t seem interested. At times, the attorney raised his voice and even shouted and called Young names.

The jurors appeared bored as Axelrod combed through Young’s bank statements and invoices. The attorney also pointed to Young calling a CNN source a “spiteful bitch” for accusing him of being a mercenary, but the jurors and their alternates, including six women, didn’t appear bothered.

The jury also seemed unhappy when Axelrod argued about semantics, claiming that Young’s LinkedIn posts about offering evacuations made it appear as though he would personally fly the planes.

Today CNN took another hit when an army major testified he would have hired Young prior to CNN’s report but not afterwards.

Major Gen. James V. Young, who is not related to the plaintiff, was the first expert witness to take the stand to share his military and intelligence experience, including his knowledge of Afghanistan leading up to the withdrawal and his thoughts on the aftermath…

When asked whether he would hire the plaintiff after watching the CNN segment, he replied “no.” …

“I would see someone like this as way too risky for our operation to be associated with,” Maj. Gen. Young said. 

Later on redirect Major Gen. Young said his opinion would have been different in the absence of the CNN report.

Asked whether he would have hired the plaintiff had the CNN segment not aired, Maj. Gen. Young replied “sure.”

That would seem to support the case Zachary Young is making. His attorney Kyle Roche asked the jury to send a message to the media.

Roche argued that jurors can “change an industry” by sending a message that will be heard by “every news organization in America.”

“Reckless journalism is un-American,” he argued. “It’s dangerous, and if media companies engage in theater in the newsroom, Americans will hold them accountable in the courtroom.”

You never know what a jury might decide to do but thus far it seems the trial isn’t going all that well for CNN.