Word: paragraphs
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Before Time Attorney Barr began his summation on Thursday, Sofaer narrowed the range of possible interpretations of the paragraph that would support Sharon's suit. He told the jurors that they could find that TIME had defamed Sharon only if they interpreted the contested paragraph to say that Sharon "consciously intended" or "actively encouraged" the Phalangists to kill civilians in the camps...
...five-hour summation to the jury on Thursday, Barr told the jurors to reread the disputed paragraph and ask themselves if it fit the judge's test * of defamation. "Look at the words again," Barr said. "Do the words say that? Do the words mean that to you?" If not, he said, "that's it. The case is over." Barr reminded the jurors of the testimony of TIME Senior Writer William E. Smith, who wrote the cover story. If Smith had meant to convey that Sharon consciously intended or encouraged a massacre, Barr argued, "he would have said...
Barr reminded the jurors that Sharon's lawyers must prove "actual malice," that is, that TIME published the paragraph knowing it to be false, or with reckless disregard for whether it was false. He insisted that staff members had worked on the story in good faith. Halevy had several sources for his account of Sharon's talks with the Phalangists, the lawyer argued. After reading the Kahan report, "he believed those sources were correct." As for the other TIME journalists who relied on Halevy's reporting, Barr said, they had read the Kahan report and trusted Halevy completely...
...plaintiff's case is too much," Barr concluded. "It reaches out beyond sense and reason." Sharon brought this lawsuit, Barr charged, because "he had to fight somebody. He couldn't sue the commission. It already had gone out of business. He picked out this one paragraph and said, 'This is the way to attack the Kahan commission . . . and that's the way I'm going to wash my hands clean of this terrible, terrible mess...
Sofaer was expected to deliver his charge to the jurors early this week. If they decide not only that the paragraph defames Sharon but that TIME published the passage knowing it was false or with reckless disregard of the truth, then they will return to the courtroom to hear evidence on Sharon's reputation. The jury would then have to determine whether Sharon was harmed by publication of the paragraph and, if so, what damages should be awarded...