BREAKING: Teter case THROWN OUT in federal court. VERITAS WINS!! pic.twitter.com/X4hEsZiiB0— Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) May 22, 2019
Teter v. Veritas is a landmark ruling that set federal precedent this morning. Federal judge threw out the plaintiff's lawsuit in stunning fashion before it even reached the jury. Defends 1st amendment and Veritas methods. We are 6-0 in lawsuits!!!— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) May 22, 2019
Today's court victory - a great moment for Veritas and the first amendment - has made local news broadcasts across the country! Our adversaries think these lawsuits slow us down, but really they only make us stronger. pic.twitter.com/Budaci5G5b— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) May 22, 2019
“if citizens and the media are handcuffed by a fear of liability, that’s detrimental to political discourse, it is detrimental to society as a whole, and it is detrimental, really, to our fundamental freedom.” https://t.co/aU3o17kgUY— Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) May 22, 2019
The Washington Times
written by Bailey Vogt
Wednesday May 22, 2019
A federal judge dismissed a woman’s libel lawsuit against conservative advocacy group Project Veritas and its founder James O’Keefe Wednesday regarding the depiction of her assault during a 2016 President Trump campaign rally.
“While the internet has broadened the number and the variety of available voices in the marketplace of ideas, it has also served to undermine the public’s confidence in the veracity of those sources,” United States District Judge Martin Reidinger, according to a transcript of Wednesday’s court session in Asheville, North Carolina.
“That fine line has to be walked. And I think that walking that fine line required this court to take a close look at what issues are really for this court and what issues are really for this jury,” he said.
He added: “if citizens and the media are handcuffed by a fear of liability, that’s detrimental to political discourse, it is detrimental to society as a whole, and it is detrimental, really, to our fundamental freedom.”
Judge Reidinger stopped the case and dismissed the jury before making his decision.
The woman, 71-year-old Shirley Teter filed a libel lawsuit after a Project Veritas video featured her being struck in the face during a protest of Mr. Trump. She claimed the video depicted her as part of a plot of Democratic operatives to cause violence.
The Judge ruled on the side of Project Veritas, who argued Teter’s lawyers did not present enough evidence of actual malice in their depiction of her and her speaking with the media about her assault made her a public figure.
Mr. O’Keefe praised the decision, saying: “Let this be a lesson to all those who abuse our legal system to settle petty political disputes. The courts have once again vindicated our undercover methods and journalism. Project Veritas is 6-0 in lawsuits for a reason – the law is on our side.”
— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) May 22, 2019Project Veritas wins in lawsuit brought by Asheville woman https://t.co/rwlTp3vXr4
The federal judge gave a passionate argument preserving our First Amendment rights. Read more here: https://t.co/7AxPRolBMb pic.twitter.com/VirjMM1npy— Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) May 22, 2019
Lawsuit was then thrown out by federal judge. https://t.co/7AoYtsXecJ— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) May 22, 2019
Why hasn't @thehill followed up on this legal story? Why only report that the defamation trial began, without following up with how the case was thrown out by the federal judge? 🤔🤔🤔 Could it be that the media would rather muddy the waters than report full truth? @RachelFrazin https://t.co/CXjQFWcMbc— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) May 22, 2019
The judge just threw the case out, ruling that the plaintiff did not have the requisite evidence to support her defamation claim. Therefore the judgement is entered in favor of Project Veritas. WILL YOU FOLLOW UP? Or will you only report on the bogus trumped-up civil claims? https://t.co/XlWi1tPwwF— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) May 22, 2019
DIRECTED VERDICT! Federal Judge throws Teter vs Veritas out before it can get to Jury, on rule 50. ‘Jury could not find any clear and convincing evidence of actual malice’ Another Case dismissed. VERITAS!— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) May 22, 2019
Project Veritas WINS Defamation Case – Undercover Journalism Vindicated https://t.co/kgA4PG87hp— Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) May 22, 2019
Project Veritas
written by Staff
Wednesday May 22, 2019
- Directed Verdict – Teter v Veritas Thrown Out By Federal Judge
- No “clear and convincing evidence of actual malice”
- Teter suit is based on “thinnest of thin reeds”
- O’Keefe: “Veritas 6 – 0 on lawsuits!”
(Asheville) A federal judge has issued a Directed Verdict in “Teter v. Project Veritas,” ruling that the plaintiff did not have the requisite evidence to support a defamation claim. Plaintiffs must prove deliberate malice on behalf of the defendant in order to prove defamation. The Directed Verdict came on the third day of the trial. Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe, who was in Asheville, North Carolina for the trial, released the following statement.
“Let this be a lesson to all those who abuse our legal system to settle petty political disputes. The courts have once again vindicated our undercover methods and journalism. Project Veritas is 6-0 in lawsuits for a reason – the law is on our side.”
United States District Judge Martin Reidinger excused the jury late in the day on May 21 and invited arguments on why O’Keefe and Project Veritas should not be granted a Directed Verdict. The attorneys for Teter struggled to convince the judge, who would not allow the First Amendment to be trampled upon.
On Wednesday, the judge articulated passionate reasoning in his ruling to protect the First Amendment rights of journalists:
“Therefore, if citizens and the media are handcuffed by a fear of liability, that’s detrimental to political discourse, it is detrimental to society as a whole, and it is detrimental, really, to our fundamental freedom.”
The judge also tactfully dismantled each plank of the plaintiff’s argument and called it the “thinnest of thin reeds.”
“Any one of these points [of the plaintiff’s argument], if they are evidence at all of actual malice, would constitute, really, the thinnest of thin reeds.”
You can read the full transcript of this morning’s proceedings below.
Project Veritas successfully defended itself and the first amendment in this case, which lasted nearly two years. “Teter v. Project Veritas” is a landmark ruling that set legal precedent for the first amendment.
No comments:
Post a Comment