In a closely watched defamation trial against CNN, jurors directed pointed questions at a network reporter regarding her persistent pursuit of U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young. Young claims CNN's November 2021 report, featured on "The Lead with Jake Tapper," falsely implied he was involved in illicit activities during the Afghanistan evacuation, damaging his reputation. The report suggested Young profited from those fleeing the country after the Biden administration's withdrawal, hinting at "black market" dealings.
Intelligence and national security correspondent Katie Bo Lillis, who worked on the story with correspondent Alex Marquardt, faced intense scrutiny from the jury about her methods in seeking Young's engagement. Judge William Henry read aloud the jurors' written inquiries, including one that asked whether Americans are obligated to speak with CNN. Lillis replied that individuals have the freedom to choose whether or not to engage. Another juror questioned how far someone must go to avoid speaking with CNN, prompting Lillis to acknowledge the "really good question." After a pause, she explained her "responsibility to the people in the story" and the public, particularly when reporting on government activities.
Lillis emphasized her belief in the importance of pursuing answers from Young, given the gravity of the situation in Afghanistan and the potential exploitation of vulnerable individuals. She highlighted the impact on service members and former intelligence officers who witnessed the chaotic withdrawal. Young had indicated a willingness to speak only if his identity remained undisclosed. Lillis explained that she prioritized investigating Young's actions due to the potential harm to Afghans fleeing the country. She also noted that Young had initially contacted her as a potential client after receiving a notification that she viewed his LinkedIn profile.
A juror questioned Lillis's statement to Young that speaking off the record would allow him to explain his side and argue against being named in the report. The juror felt this implied guilt until proven innocent. Lillis argued that news reporting standards differ from legal proceedings, focusing on newsworthiness and public interest. She defended her pursuit of the story, citing corroborating text messages as justification for her continued questioning of Young.
Another juror asked if Lillis's approach could be intimidating, a concern she dismissed given Young's public advertising of his services and his initial contact with her. Lillis reiterated that no one is obligated to speak with a reporter. When asked about an individual's right not to be named in a news story, Lillis wrestled with the concept of "right," emphasizing the responsibility of news organizations to carefully consider whether naming someone is in the public interest. She maintained that the bar was met in Young's case. Finally, regarding Young's communication with potential clients, Lillis suggested a simpler approach to disengaging would have been more appropriate. The trial is set to continue, with live streaming available on Fox News Digital.
