A lawyer for Fox argued its top executives were not directly involved enough in its coverage of false claims of voter fraud during the 2020 election to justify holding them liable for defamation.
Erin Murphy, Fox’s attorney, defended Fox during the second and final day of a pre-trial hearing in Delaware on Wednesday in the closely watched $1.6bn defamation case. It was part of her multi-pronged defense to rebut evidence presented by attorneys for Dominion Voting Systems that top executives, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, knowingly aired false claims about the company.
Dominion is suing the rightwing network over its decision to repeatedly air false claims about its voting equipment as Donald Trump and allies tried to overturn the last presidential election.
“You have to bring it home to someone who’s directly involved in the publication,” Murphy said. “Even if they have evidence that an executive knew Fox News was generally running coverage about election fraud … it’s not specific to oh yes we have knowledge about these four particular allegations.”
Both sides are asking Eric Davis, a Delaware superior court judge, to rule in their favor ahead of an expected trial in mid-April. His ruling will likely set the scope of the trial and the hearing for summary judgment featured a preview of what to expect during it.
Davis challenged Murphy’s argument at times, asking whether it was her position that top officials at the company really did not have the authority to step...
Blow the whistle, get paid. A Justice Department bounty program that incentivizes employees to blow the whistle on their employers could lead to more whistleblowing as the Trump administration inte...