The tense case of defamation against the Arizonian Samaritan started with a bombardment of factual statements by the defense lawyers. Their argument contained countless claims, and straightforward facts were being put forward to defend the newspaper company.
The Defense lawyers team instantly claimed that the article contained "official statistics", and written for the public interest which was present due to the recent events of prejudice and racism that occurred in the country. Furthermore, the defense believes that according to Arizonian Defamation Law, the newspaper company did nothing wrong and was based on pure facts so it could not possibly be false. Moreover, another lawyer came out aggressively and stated that the prosecution's arguments had "no legitimate evidence and were baseless". The defense believed that the purpose of a newspaper is to be "transparent" and there was nothing wrong in them sharing the immoral and racist situation.
Additionally, 18 million people are fighting for this common cause, so sharing the information about the wrongdoings of the police could not possibly be wrong according to the defense.
As the whole situation tenses, the public continues to become furious towards the police, and this could cause severe consequences such as anarchy. Will the jury decide who is to be blamed for this whole case? That, only time will tell.
Daksh Nayyar New York Times
Comments