5 Things to Know About New York Times Losing First Defamation Case in 50 Years

A man whom The New York Times falsely reported was present during a fatal shooting in 2023 has won the first defamation case against the paper in more than 50 years.

Jurors on Aug. 20 ruled in favor of Kai Spears, who was a freshman at the University of Alabama at the time of the shooting. Spears sued the newspaper after it said he was inside a vehicle at a fatal shooting in Tuscaloosa, where the school is located, on Jan. 15, 2023.

Spears was not in the vehicle.

Here’s what to know about the case and its potential ramifications for other defamation proceedings moving forward.

Reliance on Single Source

The article in question, published by The New York Times on March 15, 2023, said that Spears was present at the Jan. 15, 2023, fatal shooting of a woman, Jamea Harris.

A police detective said during a hearing on the shooting that there was an unidentified passenger in a vehicle with Brandon Miller, another member of the University of Alabama basketball team, at the scene of the shooting. Miller was bringing a gun to Darius Miles, a University of Alabama basketball player at the time, who has been charged with murder in the case, according to court filings.

A person “familiar with the case” who “spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters” said that the person in Miller’s vehicle was Spears, reporter Billy Witz wrote in The New York Times article. He also said that the shooting “involved members of the top-ranked Alabama men’s basketball team.”

Witz had approached Spears prior to publication and asked him if he was scared when he was in Miller’s car and shots were fired. Spears told Witz he had no comment, in line with university guidance.

Lawyers for Spears demanded a retraction after the article was published, but The New York Times declined. The paper said the lawyers did not offer evidence or details contradicting information from its anonymous source.

About two months later, The New York Times updated its story, which still described Spears as being in Miller’s vehicle when the shooting happened, citing the source, but noted that multiple University of Alabama officials said Spears was not in the vehicle.

Led to Death Threats

The false statements in the article caused Spears “severe emotional distress” and harmed his ability to advance in basketball and education, his lawyers have said.

“Spears was hounded on social media following the false report and subjected to meanspirited, threatening comments, including threats on his life,” lawyers for Spears said in a filing.

Spears was a walk-on freshman at the University of Alabama when the shooting took place. He later transferred to West Virginia’s Marshall University, where he spent two seasons.

Spears is now at West Liberty University, another school in West Virginia, where he is listed as a senior.

‘Honest Mistake’

The New York Times, which later removed the story from its website, said in court filings that it erred when it named Spears as being in the vehicle when the shooting happened, but said it did not defame Spears because the reporting was “substantially true.”

That’s partly because Spears was in Miller’s vehicle shortly before the shooting and was also with Miller himself just minutes prior to the incident, the paper’s lawyers said.

“We’re disappointed the jury found The Times liable for an honest mistake,” Charlie Stadtlander, a spokesman for The New York Times, told The Epoch Times in an Aug. 21 email.

Matt Glover, a lawyer representing Spears, said that his client is pleased with the outcome.

“Although he has always known the truth, this verdict is a public confirmation of it,” Glover told The Epoch Times via email on Aug. 21.

The jury awarded Spears $9.25 million in damages.

“We thank the jury for its service, but believe the verdict and award of damages are contrary to law and not supported by the evidence,” Stadtlander said. “We are reviewing our legal options.”

Kai Spears dribbles the ball during a practice at State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Ariz., on April 5, 2024. Christian Petersen/Getty Images

First Negative Ruling in 50 Years

The jury’s ruling was the first loss in a defamation case for The New York Times in more than 50 years.

A jury in the 1960s said the paper defamed an Alabama police commissioner, a decision upheld by the Alabama Supreme Court. But the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ruling in 1964.

In its decision, known as New York Times v. Sullivan, the nation’s top court said that when public figures are involved, defamation requires showing “actual malice” rather than just falsehoods.

Spears, though, was a private figure, meaning the case fell under a different decision from the Supreme Court, the judge overseeing the Spears case said. That ruling was from 1986, known as Philadelphia Newspapers v. Hepps, which determined that it could not be presumed that statements defaming a private figure are false. Instead, private figures must show “falsity, as well as fault.”

Prior to the trial, the judge denied a motion to dismiss from The New York Times, concluding that a reasonable jury could find that Spears was not involved in the shooting as the paper alleged.

The New York Times also highlighted precedent from another Supreme Court decision, Mason v. New Yorker Magazine, in arguing that the overall gist of its reporting was true. But the jury rejected that position, Michael McCann, professor of law at the University of New Hampshire School of Law, said on X.

Will the Verdict Change Reporting?

The verdict signals that people expect outlets to be more careful in their reporting, Lyrissa Lidsky, the Raymond & Miriam Ehrlich Eminent Scholar Chair in U.S. Constitutional Law at the University of Florida’s Levin College of Law, told The Epoch Times in an email.

“The jury apparently believed that the reporter’s mistake, which involved reliance on an anonymous source, was not just negligent but reckless,” she said.

“The case doesn’t ‘set a precedent,’ because the facts are unique and it’s a jury verdict based on those unique facts. But it comes at a time when public confidence in the press as a whole is at a low ebb, and the press cannot count on the public to believe their assertions that mistakes were honest mistakes.”

Alan Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law emeritus at Harvard Law School, said that the case might prompt a change in The New York Times reporting.

“In recent years the Times has become selectively sloppy in corroborating allegations,’ Dershowitz told The Epoch Times via email. “Its ‘mistakes’ tend to favor its ideological and political narratives. Hopefully this verdict will incentivize it to be more careful across the board.”

Shane Vogt, who represented former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in a defamation case against The New York Times, told The Epoch Times in an email that such a verdict “helps restore the balance between freedom of the press and society’s equally important right to the truth, as well as everyone’s fundamental right to protect their reputation and dignity.”

Glover, the lawyer representing Spears, said that he thinks the outcome “will improve journalism throughout the country” and boost the ability of private citizens “to hold the media accountable for their actions.”