Back to Results

DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00859.png

Source: DOCUMENTCLOUD  •  Size: 296.8 KB  •  OCR Confidence: 95.1%
View Original Image

Extracted Text (OCR)

Case 18-2868, Document 280, 08/09/2019, 2628232, Page40 of 74 Therefore, disclaiming responsibility for the media’s publication of a statement (for which she hired a publicist for the purpose of influencing the media to publish that statement) is contrary to both prevailing case law, and the cases cited by Defendant. 2. Defendant is liable for the media’s publication of the defamatory statement. After arguing, contrary to New York law, that she is not liable for the media’s publication of her own press release, Defendant next argues that she is not liable for the media’s publications of the defamatory statement contained within her press release if the media chose to make even the tiniest of editorial changes. If we understand Defendant’s argument correctly, any omission of any language from a press release is somehow a “selective, partial” publication for which she escapes liability. Mot. at 14. Once again, this claim is absurd on its face. It would mean that a defamer could send to the media a long attack on a victim with one irrelevant sentence and, when the media quite predictably cut that sentence, escape liability for the attack. Moreover, even on its face, the claim presents a jury question of what changes would be, in context, viewed as “selective” or “partial” publications — something that only a jury could determine after hearing all of the evidence. In support of this meritless argument, Defendant cites Rand v. New York Times Co., for 2G 6 the proposition that a defendant cannot be liable for a publisher’s “editing and excerpting of her statement.” 430 N.Y.S.2d 271, 274, 75 A.D.2d 417, 422 (N.Y.A.D. 1980). This argument fails for several reasons. First, there is no “republication” by the media as a matter of law. Defendant issued a defamatory statement to the press, and its publication (as Defendant intended) is not a “republication” under the law, as discussed above. Second, there was no “editing” or paraphrasing or taking the quote out of context of the core defamatory statement in the press release: that Ms. Giuffre is a liar. The “obvious lies” passage is the heart of the message 32

Document Preview

DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00859.png

Click to view full size

Extracted Information

Dates

Document Details

Filename DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00859.png
File Size 296.8 KB
OCR Confidence 95.1%
Has Readable Text Yes
Text Length 2,144 characters
Indexed 2026-02-04 12:26:40.978739