Mission Veritas’ founder, James O’Keefe, refers to Maass and others who conduct the stings as journalists. Vowing an attraction, he mentioned the jury verdict endangered hidden-camera work by a variety of journalists.
“The jury successfully dominated investigative journalists owe a fiduciary obligation to the themes they’re investigating and that investigative journalists could not deceive the themes they’re investigating,” mentioned O’Keefe, who was named as a defendant within the swimsuit and sat on the protection desk through the trial. “Journalism is on trial, and Mission Veritas will proceed to combat for each journalist’s proper to information collect, examine, and expose wrongdoing — no matter how highly effective the investigated get together could also be. Mission Veritas is not going to be intimidated.”
A Miami-based legal professional who represented Mission Veritas, Paul Calli, argued through the trial that the group’s actions have been a part of “the best American custom referred to as muckraking.”
“The race is lengthy. The combat continues as a result of this case implicates basic First Modification points,” Calli mentioned Thursday. “The oldsters on my left want to disregard that reality and can spike the ball and rejoice on Twitter as a result of on this case the journalist isn’t somebody they ‘like’ or agree with and as an alternative uncovered the smooth white underbelly of their get together. We’ll see what the end line brings.”
U.S. District Court docket Decide Paul Friedman, who oversaw the weeklong trial, may nonetheless impose punitive damages associated to a wiretapping violation discovered by the jury. Nevertheless, the jury dominated for Mission Veritas on one declare that Maass illegally recorded a gathering she wasn’t get together to.
Friedman can be nonetheless contemplating motions that Mission Veritas and the opposite defendants made through the trial that the Democratic companies and Creamer did not show any authorized violation by the group.