Lawyers delivered powerful closing arguments in the high-profile defamation trial between U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young and CNN, as the case went to the jury.
Young alleges that CNN smeared him in a November 2021 report by correspondent Alex Marquardt, implying he illegally profited off desperate people trying to flee Afghanistan during the Biden administration’s military withdrawal, damaging his professional reputation and causing him to suffer from depression and panic attacks.
Young’s lead counsel, Vel Freedman, told jurors that the report was a “calculated attack” that has inflicted deep and lasting wounds. “These are injuries that transcend monetary loss. They pierce the soul of who he is, who he was,” Freedman said. He reminded jurors that Young testified that he is on medication and in treatment for depression and panic attacks and said that no one should have to endure such pain, especially not for the purpose of clicks and views.
Freedman also highlighted several key points, including that Young was a former Navy SEAL trainee and CIA operative, and that the report did not include important facts, such as that Young never expected Afghans to pay for his services and that he only worked with corporate sponsors.
On the other hand, CNN’s lead counsel, David Axelrod, urged jurors to use their “common sense” and not to be swayed by emotions. He argued that the report was “tough but fair” and that Young put himself in the story by posting messages on LinkedIn that were visible to Afghans. He also suggested that Young didn’t suffer any actual damages, as no witnesses came forward to say they didn’t hire him because of the report.
The case is being tried before a jury, with the outcome hanging in the balance. The judge has scolded the lead counsel on both sides, with Axelrod telling jurors that they must not “deliver a message” but rather use their common sense to determine what actually happened.
