Latest News
January 1, Jury Rejects Sarah Palin’s Libel Claim Against NYT
A jury unanimously rejected former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R)’s libel lawsuit against The New York Times.
The suit stemmed from a 2011 editorial linking Palin to the shooting of then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ). Palin’s lawyers argued that the publication and its editorial editor James Bennet acted with “actual malice” in publishing the piece.
The Times later corrected the inaccuracies in the initial piece, noting a previous version had “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting.”
The jury’s decision comes after U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff indicated he would dismiss the lawsuit because Palin’s attorneys failed to prove that the NYT acted maliciously.
“I think this [was] an example of very unfortunate editorializing on the part of The Times,” Rakoff said.
“The law here sets a very high standard [for actual malice]. The court finds that that standard has not been met.”
A Times spokesperson said the publication welcomed the decision.
“It is a reaffirmation of a fundamental tenet of American law: public figures should not be permitted to use libel suits to punish or intimidate news organizations that make, acknowledge and swiftly correct unintentional errors.”
On the witness stand last week, Palin said the editorial devastated her.
“It was devastating to read, again, an accusation, a false accusation that I had anything to do with murder, murdering innocent people,” she said.
Palin’s lawyers are expected to appeal.
Source:
New York Times found not liable in Palin defamation case
-
Entertainment3 months ago‘He’s A Pr*ck And F*cking Hates Republicans’: Megyn Kelly Goes Off on Don Lemon
-
Entertainment8 months agoWhoopi Goldberg’s “Wildly Inappropriate” Commentary Forces “The View” into Unscheduled Commercial Break
-
Entertainment7 months agoLate Night Host is Getting Canceled After Staffers Speak Out
-
Entertainment3 months agoBeach Boys Founder Brian Wilson Announces Tragic News
-
Featured8 months agoUS Advises Citizens to Leave This Country ASAP
-
Entertainment2 months agoComedy Mourns Legend Richard Lewis: A Heartfelt Farewell
-
Featured7 months agoBenghazi Hero: Hillary Clinton is “One of the Most Disgusting Humans on Earth”
-
Latest News2 months agoSupreme Court Gift: Trump’s Trial Delayed, Election Interference Allegations Linger
pizzaman68
February 17, 2022 at 9:47 am
Commie news paper,commie judge and a very commie jury. A good,honest person has no chance against total corruption.
Ted Weiland
February 17, 2022 at 1:32 pm
JURY WARNING!
“…Most Constitutionalists favor the jury system, provided jury nullification (a juror’s right to judge a law as unjust, oppressive, or inapplicable to any particular case) is in force. However, even if jury nullification were restored, juries would still render decisions based upon each jury’s collective standard of morality or immorality. “A jury drawn from the [Biblically] uninstructed population is no better equipped to administer the just requirements of God’s law than a corrupt judge.”35 A jury awarded $2.3 million to Stella Liebeck when she burned herself with McDonald’s coffee, and a jury found O.J. Simpson innocent on all charges. Although it might be argued that it only takes one juror to dissent and prevent a “railroad job,” most people lack the independence and resolution to resist the will of a majority. More often than not, today’s jurors reflect the type of people we are warned against in Exodus 23:
‘Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment.’ (Exodus 23:2)
“Juries produce, at best, erratic justice. Without Yahweh’s law as the standard, jury decisions are based upon the capricious morality of its members….
“When a judicial system is governed by Biblically qualified judges – whose decisions are based upon Yahweh’s commandments, statutes, and judgments – juries are unnecessary. Under such a system, all judicial decisions reflect Yahweh’s never-changing morality. In Deuteronomy 25:1, Yahweh admonished judges to “justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.” Where is this most likely to occur – in the courts of sinners or in the courts of the saints? Do not look for it in the courts of the unrighteous:
‘Her princes within her are roaring lions; her judges are evening wolves … they have done violence to the law.’ (Zephaniah 3:3-4) ….”
For more, see Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at Bible versus Constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Books page and scroll down to Chapter 6.
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”
Ted Weiland
February 18, 2022 at 12:18 pm
JURY WARNING!
“…Most Constitutionalists favor the jury system, provided jury nullification (a juror’s right to judge a law as unjust, oppressive, or inapplicable to any particular case) is in force. However, even if jury nullification were restored, juries would still render decisions based upon each jury’s collective standard of morality or immorality. “A jury drawn from the [Biblically] uninstructed population is no better equipped to administer the just requirements of God’s law than a corrupt judge.”35 A jury awarded $2.3 million to Stella Liebeck when she burned herself with McDonald’s coffee, and a jury found O.J. Simpson innocent on all charges. Although it might be argued that it only takes one juror to dissent and prevent a “railroad job,” most people lack the independence and resolution to resist the will of a majority. More often than not, today’s jurors reflect the type of people we are warned against in Exodus 23:
‘Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment.’ (Exodus 23:2)
“Juries produce, at best, erratic justice. Without Yahweh’s law as the standard, jury decisions are based upon the capricious morality of its members….
“When a judicial system is governed by Biblically qualified judges – whose decisions are based upon Yahweh’s commandments, statutes, and judgments – juries are unnecessary. Under such a system, all judicial decisions reflect Yahweh’s never-changing morality. In Deuteronomy 25:1, Yahweh admonished judges to “justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.” Where is this most likely to occur – in the courts of sinners or in the courts of the saints? Do not look for it in the courts of the unrighteous:
‘Her princes within her are roaring lions; her judges are evening wolves … they have done violence to the law.’ (Zephaniah 3:3-4) ….”
For more, see Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at Bible versus Constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Books page and scroll down to Chapter 6.
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”