The federal jury ruled Thursday that Time magazine did not knowingly or recklessly publish a false story about Sharon.
Sharon lost his $50 million libel suit.
The jury had deliberated for 11 days. Previously, the jury had found that the Time article was false and that it was defamatory. But, because Sharon was a public figure, he had to show that the magazine had acted with actual malice—publishing the article knowing it to be false or in reckless disregard for the truth—in order to win the suit. In other words, the article must have been published with Time knowing it was false or seriously doubting its accuracy. The jury ruled that Time had not done so. The jury had been wrestling with the legal issue of actual malice since last Friday.
Jury foreman Richard Peter Zug read a statement that the jury had unanimously agreed upon. Zug's statement said that the jurors believed certain Time employees, especially Jerusalem correpondent David Halevy, had acted "negligently and even carelessly."
It should be remembered, however, that acting "negligently
|
and carelessly" is not the same as acting in "reckless disregard."
Sharon and his wife were expressionless when the verdict was read. Later, on the courthouse steps, Sharon said: "I feel we have achieved what brought us here, and I accept it. It was a very long and hard struggle, and it was worth it.
"I came here to prove that Time magazine lied; we were able to prove that Time magazine did lie ... and they were careless."
Also quoted was Sharon's lawyer, Milton Gould, who said that Sharon "didn't come here for any money. He came here for vindication, and he's been vindicated.... From a legal point of view ... we're very happy with the result."
Time managing editor Ray Cave was quoted: "Needless to say, we're immensely pleased with the verdict."
Also quoted was a written statement issued by the magazine: "Time feels strongly that the case should never have reached an American courtroom. It was brought by a foreign politician attempting to recoup his political fortunes."
Halevy was not present in the courtroom when Zug read his statement.
|
Exercise 22.9
(21.0K)
2007 McGraw-Hill Higher Education