By The American Tribune | Created at 2025-01-17 20:33:01 | Updated at 2025-01-20 16:58:39
2 days ago
In big news for those wanting to push back against the leftist mainstream media’s ability to go on the unfair attack against those with whom it disagrees, CNN just lost a major defamation case against United States Navy Veteran Zachary Young. Mr. Young argued that CNN destroyed his business and his personal reputation with a lie-filled segment about him.
As background, that segment was a report on Mr. Young’s attempt to help Afghans leave Afghanistan in the wake of the Taliban’s 2021 national victory and the route of American forces that ended in an ignominious, overly fast withdrawal in which thousands of American allies were left behind by the retreating military.
In the segment, CNN chief national security correspondent Alexander Marquardt defamed Mr. Young with what many saw as a hit peace, comparing the Navy veteran to greedy smugglers of humans who were charging exorbitant fees to get people out of the country. Mr. Young contended, and was found correct in saying, that was a defamatory description of his business.
The segment at issue consisted of Mr. Marquardt claiming, while only referencing Mr. Young’s company, that “desperate Afghans are being exploited” and being forced to “exorbitant, often impossible amounts” to leave their Taliban-taken over country. The story only mentioned Mr. Young’s company, seemingly indicating that he was profiteering off of their suffering.
In the story, Marquardt said that young was asking $75,000 to transport a vehicle of passengers to Pakistan or $14,500 per person to get them into the United Arab Emirates. Commenting on that before trying to call Young to comment on the hit piece, Marquardt described the service as “Prices well beyond the reach of most Afghans.”
Marquardt went on to add, referring to Mr. Young, “In a text message, he told CNN that Afghans trying to leave are expected to have sponsors pay for them.” He then added that the Navy veteran “repeatedly declined to break down the cost or say if he’s making money.” At issue was that CNN essentially accused him of criminal activity, as they put his face and messages next to a graphic about “black markets.”
Mr. Young did not, however, engage in criminal activity. In fact, Circuit Court judge William S. Henry expressly ruled that Young “did not act illegally or criminally.” So, Mr. Young sued CNN and argued that its segment on him had aa “a very immediate and devastating impact on [his] life,” due to the suggestion of criminality.
The jury agreed, finding that CNN “destroyed his reputation and business” when it essentially portrayed him as an “illegal profiteer” who exploited “desperate Afghans.” Important is that sponsors paid Mr. Young to help; he wasn’t directly targeting those who were themselves trying to flee from the Taliban.
So, agreeing with Mr. Young’s characterization of what CNN did, jurors awarded him $5 million for lost business opportunities and pain and suffering. Their ruling took 8.5 hours of deliberation across two days. That is not all, however. The jury now has to decide on punitive damages, which could be quite severe.
Watch the segment in question here:
"*" indicates required fields
