Posted on 01/09/2025 11:55:49 AM PST by Mount Athos
U.S. Navy veteran and Plaintiff Zachary Young continued his testimony Wednesday in the $1 billion defamation trial against CNN. The morning’s testimony featured the jurors being shown fairly damaging messages between Young and CNN reporters Katie Bo Lillis and Alex Marquardt. The messages showed Young was lied to about the nature of CNN’s reporting and Young warning them what they were about to air on TV was factually inaccurate. The jurors looked on intently and were taking copious notes.
The jury was first shown how Lillis made contact with Young under the false pretenses that she was doing background research on the situation in Afghanistan. "Please let me know if I can assist with any Afghan evac requirements," he told her. "Is CNN involved with rescue efforts..." he asked, wondering if they wanted to sponsor an evacuation.
Lillis said CNN wasn't interested in his service but rather "working on some reporting related to ongoing efforts to help get at-risk Afghans out of the country..." Young testified that he thought she was doing "general reporting" about the situation.
As a "quiet professional," Young said he was more than willing to talk with her off the record.
Lillis ominously told him she wanted to talk and allow him "the opportunity...to make your case to keep your name out of it." "I'm a straight shooter, I'll be frank with you about where we are," she claimed.
That was a lie. CNN ended up blindsiding Young and publishing their allegedly defamatory report, giving him only two hours to respond, which came up later with Young’s interaction with Marquardt. "To me it feels like something is being hidden," Young said of his mind set at this point in their conversation, seemingly picking up on the deception.
"We've been doing a series of stories on evacuations and the various different models folks are following...and just want to talk about the lay of the land," Lillis lied to Young.
"I would have been happy to [talk off the record]," Young reiterated. "No Afghan is expected to pay for evac costs, none would ever be able," he told Lillis in a text message. He also told her it was "a highly unstable environment."
Young told Lillis that whoever brought him to her attention had their own motivations for doing so. As noted yesterday, that person was CNN's source Jill Kornetsky, who accused Young of being a mercenary and “pocketing” millions, without evidence.
"As you proceed, I would just appreciate if you would take the time to make sure you have your facts right to avoid libel," Young warned Lillis. Young testified that at that time he was not aware that CNN was working on a story targeting him. That would come later with his interaction with Marquardt.
The jury was shown messages from Marquardt where he falsely told Young he "tried calling you last week but you didn't pick up." "We are going to be running a piece in which we detail your interactions with people inquiring about your services..." Marquardt ambushed Young and again lying about previously reaching out.
"Hi Alexander. Please provide a list of questions, as well as the facts and assertions about me you intend to publish. I will need some time to review and provide comment," Young wrote back. When Marquardt said Young only had two hours to respond, Young warned him: "That’s definitely not a realistic deadline. In any case, i can tell you for sure, some of your facts/assertions for [sic] not accurate, and if they are published, i will seek legal damages."
The jurors appeared to be studying the text messages intently when they were shared on the TV screen.
All six jurors and two alternates watched intently as Young’s lead counsel Vel Freedman showed them teasers from Jake Tapper’s show The Lead, where he told viewers they would hear a news report about people who "preyed" on Afghans and wanted them to "pay up big time to get out." In a second teaser, Tapper falsely claimed Afghans need to "pay the price" for evacuation.
There was similar language used against Young in all six airings of Marquardt’s report, both domestically and internationally on CNN International. All of them claimed Young was operating a "black market" operation. One CNN International anchor said people like Young were "unscrupulous."
Multiple jurors took notes about how often CNN played the allegedly defamatory report from Marquardt; and the repeated use of "black market." One juror also didn't seem to appreciate CNN's lead counsel David Axelrod calling comments on CNN's Facebook video of Marquardt's report "irrelevant."
Young testified he had a "breakdown" after the report aired. "Panic was like a snowball rolling downhill," he told the jury. Recalling his training about "getting off the X" in a combat zone, Young testified he deleted a bunch of his posts and things that led back to him.
The jury was also shown a post from James Daniels, a purported math and history professor who falsely claimed Young sent him a computer virus and was "masquerading as a Navy vet."
Young testified that he never interacted with Daniels.
During cross-examination, Axelrod claimed to the jury — without evidence such as timestamps — that the Daniels post was made prior to the CNN report, and held up the negative opinion of Young. But again, the post also falsely claimed that Young was not really a Navy vet; bringing into question the veracity of the whole post.
Following lunch, things would get heavy after that point as Young got emotional while explaining how the CNN story "completely destroyed" him and was rough for his aging mother.
Freedman asked his client, "Have you worked since the CNN broadcast?" and "Have you made any money since the CNN broadcast?" To both, Young answered "no."
Young testified he was having "multiple panic attacks a day" and barely slept after CNN's report aired. He wanted to hide and stop all the hate he was getting from "trolls" online who were tracing him down and harassing him.
"I know I'm not the same man that I was. I'm not the man that my wife married," Young said, with emotion in his voice. "I feel like a total failure." The emotion overtook Young as he admitted it had harmed the “intimacy” with his wife. “I'm the rock. I've always been the rock. It's not that way anymore," he added. "I have to rely on her for that. It shouldn't be that way."
In addition to talking about how he’s now on antidepressants and other strong medications, Young added further:
' stopped taking care of myself … I was wearing the same clothes for three to four days at a time. I stopped using deodorant, I stopped showering … I don’t believe myself … I feel like I have just been completely destroyed, embarrassed and emasculated … I'm still in psychotherapy. It's not something improving or getting better...this is my life.
CNN’s cross-examination took up the rest of the day and didn’t seem to go well for them judging by the reactions from the jury.
Axelrod spent a lot of time going over Young's tax returns and the large carryover of losses in the years prior to the CNN report. Only a couple of the jurors were taking notes during that dense conversation and a couple more were glancing around the room, one of them even yawned.
A lot of that conversation revolved around Young's classified work for the U.S. government as a contractor, which the jury was not privy to, thus it was filled with allusions to what was in documents. Some of the jurors seemed confused as they tried to keep up. Some were trying to take notes.
Toward the end of the day, the cross-examination seemed to be dragging and, from inside the courtroom, it was evident in the body language of the jury with a few rocking in their chairs. Another had a hand over their eyes; that juror also yawned.
The cross-examination of Young will continue on Thursday.
Die, CNN! Die!
Hope he wins!
Sounds like he has good lawyers.
I just heard about this today for the first time, since I haven’t watched CNN in decades.
I read a few articles on this, but they didn’t shed much light on Young’s activities other than he was involved with getting people evacuated for money.
I don’t have a problem with his doing it for money. CNN or the government weren’t helping, did they expect the guy to do it for free, especially in a collapsing and hazardous environment?
I was doing a Trump standout in my blue state back in October, and was approached by a guy with a very friendly demeanor who said he was a reporter for a local newspaper, and he asked if he could interview me.
I politely and civilly told him: “Nothing personal here, but I will decline since I don’t trust your profession.”
Then he entered full moonbat mode and showed his true self. He was no reporter, he obviously was looking for something he could post online.
Good sentiments.
How about Musk buying them and changing it to ENN (Elon News Network)?
How does CNN get a math teacher/OEF Vet to make that slander post about him? Random and interesting to think of the assets and favors that are available. Investigating that teacher would be an interesting rabbit hole?
Nowadays, who’s phone doesn’t go to voice mail when no one accepts the call?
*
I hope he scores big and it crushes CNN, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
What people need to remember is that the Biden administration left hundreds of Americans and Afghanistan’s who were helpful to us, in Afghanistan.
There are efforts by multiple organizations trying to get them out as they are being targeted for helping the Americans. The Biden administration like Odumbo & Benghazi, have left Americans behind.
Just for the record, I am fully onboard with getting out every single person who helped us officially...with one key proviso: They have to be vetted. They have to be official, and they have to have an American who worked with them who would stand up and say “Yes. He is a good man. We need to get him and his family out.”
To me, one of the blackest stains on our national conscience was leaving all those people in Vietnam to the tender mercies of the Communists. I had a very personal relationship with one of them, and he told me what happened to him after we left him behind. Two years in a re-education camp in the jungle, and he escaped and made his way to Australia and eventually, the US.
America has plenty of black marks on our conscience for those that have one, such as our treatment of the Soviet POWs in Germany that we handed back to the Soviets, knowing full well what would happen to them, that kind of thing.
I viewed Afghanistan in that same light.
Whiner. He’s a tool who was working as hard as he could to bring in Afghans to America.
He’s no hero.
And you continue to be a disgrace to this website........Sheesh!
You’re a disgrace. Running to defend a CIA guy trying to bring as many pagan moslem Afghans into America as he can.
I thought JR purged you Stormfronters from this site decades ago. How did you escape?
it’d be so awesome if Zachary ended up literally OWNING CNN ...
Story sounds similar to what my brother experienced when he was in Viet Nam. My brother was an Army intelligence officer, and was one of the ones CBS’ Dan Rather interviewed when Rather went into the war zone for a story. While inside the compound, and with Rather talking to him, the camera crew was freely walking around filming. Later, after my brother was able to see the CBS “special report” newscast, it made him angry and forever distrust the broadcast “news” business. He said apparently all they wanted was to get film to “authenticate” and advance a desired narrative. (ie a propaganda film) When Rather reported his “findings”, my brother said it was like the story had been written in New York before the “news” crew ever got on the plane to Viet Nam. They knew what they wanted to tell the Amercian people, but they had to actually go to Viet Nam and take pictures in order to fool people into actually believing them.
From that day forward, I have never taken for gospel what the media says without having some way to know it was likely true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.