According to a court filing exclusively obtained by NewsBusters, CNN’s Jake Tapper refused to answer basic questions about his show’s finances, including his salary, during a sworn deposition on Wednesday. The legal team for Plaintiff and Navy veteran Zachary Young was now requesting Florida’s 14 Circuit Court to step in and force him to answer the questions.
Tapper was compelled into being deposed by a previous court order against CNN back in August as part of the $1 billion defamation suit they’re facing. During a hearing on August 13, Judge William Scott Henry said he had a “hard time believing” Tapper’s declaration to the court that he didn’t know anything about the finances of his show, The Lead.
In the hearing, CNN counsel Allison Lovelady quoted Tapper as saying “I have no knowledge about CNN's net worth. I don't have any knowledge regarding what the Tapper show may or may not generate that may go toward CNN's net worth."
Video from the hearing on August 13,2024
“I kind of have a hard time believing what Mr. Tapper put in that declaration,” Judge Henry said, referencing Tapper's stated lack of knowledge. "I have a feeling that is the basis of what time slot he gets and how much his contract is and everything else with CNN."
In their motion on Friday, lead counsel for Young, Vel Freedman quoted Judge Henry’s order that questions to Tapper “may relate to financial things for his show, penalties, things of that nature that would relate to his show . . . So it’s only limited to financial type of issues.”
The filing details how Tapper refused to answer questions in line with the order and CNN’s present counsel stepped in to intercede in several answers as Tapper was delivering them (emphasis included in original filing):
Mr. Tapper sat for deposition on November 20, 2024. In the course of less than two hours, CNN’s counsel directed Tapper not to answer more than thirty questions. The end result was that CNN prevented Plaintiffs from (1) gathering basic financial information (e.g., Tapper’s salary); (2) exploring issues the jury might need to assess a punitive damages award (e.g., Tapper’s opinion on what financial penalty might deter CNN from future misconduct); and (3) from even asking for clarification of Tapper’s answers or getting complete answers to the questions the witness did answer (e.g., interrupting the witness mid-answer saying: “Just answer the question as asked”).
Freedman listed off “Some of the more egregious examples of CNN’s improper instructions” which included: “CNN instructed Tapper not to answer questions about his salary, which clearly constitutes information about the finances of CNN and his show” and “CNN instructed Tapper not to answer questions about financial penalties that directly tracked the Court’s order.”
The deposition transcript excerpts included in the filing were redacted, likely from CNN’s insistence that anything and everything discussed about how CNN’s runs its shop was confidential. Just like how they had the court seal their journalistic standards guidelines to block them from public view, which was the exact opposite of how the Associated Press and The New York Times present theirs.
Despite the redactions, it was clear that CNN didn’t want transparency for the jury by having their counsel interject and stop Tapper from answering:
During the deposition, Tapper would at times respond with answers injecting topics or issues into the deposition. When counsel tried to follow up on those answers, or seek clarity or further explanation of them, CNN’s counsel objected.
(…)
Another example occurred when Tapper injected comments made before the deposition commenced into the deposition. When Plaintiffs asked for clarification and follow up, CNN instructed Tapper not to respond, prejudicing Plaintiffs from making a full record for the jury.
(…)
In another instance, CNN’s counsel cut Tapper off mid-sentence to stop him from testifying about something CNN didn’t want him to, despite the issue not being privileged.
This was just the latest instance of CNN trying to keep crucial information about the facts of the case and about CNN from getting to a jury.
Earlier this month, CNN tried to get Young’s expert witness kicked off the case by essentially arguing that he was just too good. CNN was also trying to keep the jury from learning that they gave reporter Alex Marquardt a big promotion and pay raise despite being the one largely responsible for getting them wrapped up in the defamation suit.
The trial is slated to begin January 6, 2025.
