Internal messages consistently showed CNN reporters and editors disparaging Navy vet Zachary Young—and casting doubt on their story about him
PANAMA CITY, Fla.—The jury in the bombshell defamation suit against CNN found the liberal network defamed Navy veteran Zachary Young by airing coverage that portrayed him as an “illegal profiteer” who operated in a “black market” when he worked to evacuate Afghans during the chaotic U.S. withdrawal. As a result, the left-wing network is on the hook for $5 million in damages—with potentially more to come.
Young alleged that the November 2021 report, which aired on The Lead with Jake Tapper, irreparably destroyed his reputation and his business, Nemex Enterprises. He testified that he hasn’t worked or made money since the segment ran. The jury awarded Young $4 million for economic and $1 million for emotional damages. Jurors will now return to deliberations to determine punitive damages.
Jurors spent hours deliberating Thursday before stopping around 10 p.m. eastern. They returned Friday morning and deliberated for another four hours before handing down their decision around 12:20 p.m.
CNN faced a number of blows throughout the trial. The jury was shown embarrassing internal messages between editors and reporters, the judge repeatedly reprimanded network attorney David Axelrod, and jurors seemed ready to rule against CNN even before deliberations began.
During Thursday’s closing arguments, Axelrod said Young “put himself in the story” and “inserted himself into it to make a buck.” Then he told the jury to “use your common sense.”
Young’s lead attorney, Devin Freedman, accused CNN of showing contempt for the jury. “This is supposed to be the most trusted name in news,” he said during his own closing arguments.
“But they stand up here and they talk down to us with bold-faced lies about what the segment’s gist really is, and they expect you to believe it,” Freedman continued. “I mean, do they think we’re all stupid?”
Court proceedings showed CNN staff calling Young “a shit,” expressing their desire to “nail this mf—er,” and describing Young as having a “punchable face.” Messages also showed chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt, who delivered the segment against Young, giving the Navy veteran only two hours to respond to a detailed list of questions.
Young told Marquardt that was “not a realistic deadline” and that “some of your facts/assertions are not accurate, and if they are published, I will seek legal damages.” CNN staff seemed to agree that two hours was too short, especially since Marquardt asked Young about his apparent ties to the CIA. But CNN moved forward anyway.
CNN editors and reporters also had serious issues with the article accompanying Marquardt’s segment. One suggested killing the story entirely, saying it was “full of holes like Swiss cheese.” Another, national security reporter Nicole Gaouette, said the prices Young was charging to evacuate Afghans may have been reasonable since the costs associated with those efforts were “seriously expensive.”
“So the inference running through Alex’s story that these people are just bilking desperate Afghans for their money might not be fair at all,” Gaouette wrote in an email.
Axelrod, meanwhile, caught Judge William Henry’s scorn on several occasions during court proceedings. At one point, the attorney tried submitting a surprise bombshell: a document he claimed showed Young lied when testifying that he hadn’t worked since the CNN segment aired. Axelrod insulted Young and his team while making that claim.
Henry, in response, issued an order that “whoever makes a personal insult to the other side is going to pay a $100 fine each time it happens.” It was primarily directed at Axelrod.
Axelrod’s surprise document ultimately collapsed. Young testified that it wasn’t a work contract like the attorney claimed, but rather a form he submitted to keep his security clearance active.
On Wednesday, Henry scolded Axelrod for repeatedly calling Young a “liar” and said he owed the veteran an apology.
“Now your credibility with me, Mr. Axelrod, is about none,” Henry said.
Axelrod eventually did apologize. Several CNN staffers, however, refused to apologize to Young for the segment, arguing that one wasn’t warranted. The network did issue an apology, but anchor Jake Tapper was out when it was delivered. Marquardt also declined to apologize to Young, though he did boast about his Emmy Awards during his testimony.
After reporter Katie Bo Lillis’s testimony toward the end of court proceedings, the jury submitted unflattering questions suggesting they were ready to rule against CNN. In messages revealed in court proceedings, Lillis described herself as a “straight shooter” in her early interactions with Young, suggested he would have the opportunity to “make your case to keep your name out of” any story, and assured him she only wanted to talk to get the “lay of the land” on private Afghan evacuations.
Lillis defended her conduct, telling the court, “You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.”
When she finished her testimony, the jury peppered her with questions like “Do you feel Americans are obligated to speak to you?” and, “To what length must someone go to in order not to speak to you?” Another juror asked, “At what point do you accept someone not wishing to speak or comment?” A fourth said, “A chance to make your case to keep your name out of it sounds akin to guilty until proven innocent.”
This article was originally published at freebeacon.com
