Panama City, Florida – Jurors in A high-stakes defamation trial Against CNN has reserved some of the toughest questions for the reporter regarding her aggressive pursuit of US Navy veteran Zachary Young, the plaintiff in the case.
Young claims CNN defamed him in a November 2021 report by reporter Alex Marquardt that first aired on “The Lead with Jake Tapper,” suggesting he illegally profited from desperate people trying to flee Afghanistan in the wake of the war. . Biden administration Military withdrawal, meaning he became involved in “black market” dealings with his professional reputation destroyed as a result.
Katie Beau Lillis, the intelligence and national security reporter who collaborated with Marquardt on the story, was peppered with questions about her behavior in her spirited efforts to persuade Young to do business with CNN.
The questions, which the jurors submitted in writing, were read aloud to Lillis by Judge William Henry.
CNN correspondent Katie Beau Lillis was questioned by a jury about her behavior with US Navy veteran Zachary Young during the network's high-stakes defamation trial. (Fox News Digital/Law & Crime)
“Do you feel that Americans are obligated to talk to you or to CNN?” Henry read the first question.
“No, no one is obligated to talk to us,” Lillis replied. “It's their free decision if they choose to or not.”
“How far does someone have to go to not talk to you? Does he have to talk to you not to talk to you?” The judge read the next question.
“That's a really good question,” was Lilis's amused reaction.
CNN defamation trial: Network's chief justice defends controversial report at center of lawsuit
After a long pause, Lillis told jurors she had a “responsibility to the people in the story” as well as “the American public, the American taxpayers, especially when I write about government activities.”
“In this case, we had someone who would benefit from the misery of others from a tragic and catastrophic situation in Afghanistan. I felt the highest priority I had was to continue to press for answers from Mr. Young, instead of backing down,” Lillis said. About looking for answers here.” “Because in this case, I was thinking about Afghans who are trying to get out of the country. “And I was thinking about the many, many service members and former CIA officers, CIA officers, officers that I know for whom this has been the case. 'Incredibly personal and incredibly painful, the idea that there are people who are going to be left behind.'
US Navy veteran Zachary Young told Lillis he would not speak to her unless she guaranteed she would not identify him in any reports. (Jessica Costescu)
Lillis was then asked, “When do you accept someone who doesn't want to talk or comment?” “It depends a lot on the context,” she replied, adding that she had a “higher priority” in looking into Young's activities.
The same follow-up juror then asked, “Do they lose that right when they express discomfort or evade questions?” Lillis stressed that anyone has the “right” not to talk to her, but noted that Young initially reached out to her as a potential client, but that was only after he received notification that Lillis had viewed his LinkedIn profile.
“He could have stopped answering any of my questions. He could have completely withdrawn. He didn't do any of those things. He continued to talk to me,” Lillis told the jury.
One juror recalled a conversation between Lillis and Young, who did not want to be identified in any report, when she told him that speaking informally would give him “the opportunity to understand what we're working on… Make your case to get your name out of it.”
“The chance of making your case to get your name out of it seems more like a conviction until proven innocent,” the juror wrote as Judge Henry read it aloud. “Can you explain how your approach is really the opposite, innocent until proven guilty?”
“Well, first of all, you know, we're not a court of law,” Lillis replied. “Like the standards that determine whether someone's behavior is newsworthy, whether or not it ends up in a news article, whether or not it's illegal. And in this case, you know, whether it should be revealed that someone What he might benefit from was “about the misery of the Afghans,” adding, “We got enough support in the form of these text messages, basically, to indicate that there was a reason to ask these questions, and so we were continuing to ask them, but, you know.” ..he had a case if we knew there was More here, we'll back off. Does this answer the question?”
“Unanswered,” Judge Henry said with a laugh, then moved on to the next question: “Can you understand, in light of this new perspective, that your approach could intimidate someone?” He explained that it was a follow-up to the previous question.
A juror accused CNN's Katie Beau Lillis' letter to Navy veteran Zachary Young about making his case why it shouldn't be reported as “more like guilt until proven innocent.” (Fox News Digital/Law & Crime)
Lillis acknowledged that in theory someone might be “afraid of a reporter approaching them,” but refuted that idea in this case given that Young was publicly advertising his own services on LinkedIn and that he messaged her first.
“If you feel vulnerable people are being exploited, is there someone obligated to talk to you?” another juror asked, to which Lillis responded by emphasizing that no one was “obligated” to talk to her.
“Do people have the right not to have their names mentioned in a news story?” one juror asked, confusing a CNN reporter.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
After a moment of contemplation, Lillis said she was having trouble understanding the word “correct.”
“I think it's the responsibility of news organizations and reporters like me to think carefully about whether the behavior we're going to expose and the person we're going to name is newsworthy, and whether it's in the public interest to know whether this behavior is occurring or whether this person is being named is a person,” Lillis said. “In this case, I feel strongly that this condition has been met.”
The jury's final question concerned her judgment on Young when he remains silent or turns away potential clients once he learns they do not have the financial means to hire him, asking, “What do you think is the appropriate way to disengage?” “A simple 'I can't help it' would probably have been an appropriate response,” Lillis responded, adding that what Young did “seemed a little harsh to me.”
The trial resumes on Thursday and will be broadcast live Fox News Digital.
