Judge: There is no “mark” of evidence in the Palin v. NYT defamation case

NEW YORK (AP) – A judge who slandered Sarah Palin against The New York Times on Tuesday denied her request for a new trial, saying she had not provided “even a speck” of evidence needed to prove genuine malice. from the newspaper.

U.S. District Judge Jed Rokaff made such a statement in a written decision when he rejected the claims of Palin’s attorneys after the trial.

Her lawyers asked the judge to hold a new trial or dismiss him as biased against her, citing several of Rokaf’s evidentiary decisions that they believed were errors. They ranged from how jurors were interrogated during the jury selection, to how jurors were instructed when they asked questions during the discussion.

“In fact, none of this was wrong, not to mention the reason for giving Palin a new trial,” the judge said.

Rocaff wrote that despite her post-trial motions, Palin was required at a trial earlier this year to show that a mistake in a published editorial was motivated by genuine malice – a demand in a defamation lawsuit involving public figures.

“And what was surprising about the trial here was that Palin, despite all her previous allegations, was unable in the end to present even a speck of such evidence,” he said.

Palin’s lawyers declined to comment on Rakaf’s ruling.

The New York Times did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The defamation lawsuit against Palin, a one-time Republican vice presidential candidate and former governor of Alaska, focused on a newspaper editorial in 2017 that falsely linked her campaign rhetoric to the mass shooting, which Palin claimed damaged her reputation and punishment. era.

The Times acknowledged that their editorial was inaccurate, but said it quickly corrected mistakes they called an “honest mistake” that never intended to harm Palin.

Rokaff announced in February even before the jury concluded the discussion that he intended to dismiss the lawsuit because Palin could not show that the Times was acting out of anger. The jury themselves rejected Palin’s lawsuit the next day.

Rakaf said he believes it is fair for all parties not to wait for the jury’s verdict because he has already ruled out the law that Palin has not proved himself right.

Her lawyers called the time of Rakaf’s announcement another reason to appoint a new court.

Source link