In the CNN defamation trial, the editor who claimed the story was "full of holes like Swiss cheese" faced intense questioning on the witness stand.

On Tuesday, CNN senior national security editor Thomas Lumley was questioned in court over internal messages revealing his doubts about the "seriously flawed" report at the heart of a high-profile defamation case.

A U.S. Navy veteran, Zachary Young, claims that CNN falsely accused him in a November 2021 report on "The Lead with Jake Tapper" of illegally profiting off people trying to escape Afghanistan after the Biden administration's withdrawal. The report, which was initially broadcast on TV and later turned into a print piece on CNN's website, damaged his professional reputation.

Over six years at CNN, Lumley felt the report was "full of holes like Swiss cheese," leading to his call as a witness after internal messages were discovered.

During Lumley's testimony, jurors were presented with a range of emails and messages, including one in which he proposed that reporter Alex Marquardt include details on whether individuals who pay large sums for evacuation from Afghanistan actually manage to escape.

Marquardt's print article draft was received by Lumley, who responded by stating that one major issue was unclear to him. He questioned whether any of the individuals who pay these individuals ever leave the country. Lumley believed that a paragraph was necessary to clarify this point. He expressed his belief that the situation was entirely hopeless.

A CNN editor sent a message to Lumley one minute later, expressing surprise that Marquardt's report was approved by CNN's fact-checking apparatus "triad," despite not understanding a fundamental question about the story.

Lumley advised CNN not to report on Young's testimony about rescuing women from Afghanistan, which was later revealed to be true.

Lumley stated that he had a question he wanted to address when asked by Young's lead counsel Vel Freedman about the report.

The editor of CNN tried to retract his earlier remarks to his colleagues.

Lumley stated that the words on the page were his, but he believed his question about the story was a storytelling question rather than a query about the accuracy and fairness of the story, which is the focus of 'triad'.

"I said, 'I'm somewhat surprised,' but upon reflection, I realized that my thought was only slightly imprecise."

Did Freedman consult with CNN's legal team before giving testimony?

Lumley stated that their meeting last night was brief, lasting approximately 45 minutes, and they had multiple meetings in Washington prior to the holidays, totaling around four hours.

Freedman presented the jury with another internal message from Lumley, who wrote, "The story is actually good (without the digital write or TV script addressing a fundamental question)."

Freedman presented Lumley's messages to the jury, which stated, "It's unclear if everyone is being defrauded," emphasizing their significance.

Lumley recommends pausing the report if Marquardt cannot provide answers to the crucial question.

"If he doesn't know the answer to that fundamental question, I'd say we really need to pause until we find out. I'm hoping Alex knows but just forgot to mention."

Lumley affirmed under oath that he sent those messages and the report was aired on "The Lead with Jake Tapper" shortly after. Lumley then paused the print piece.

We have paused the digital version of CNN's website. Although my fundamental question has been answered, the issue is less of a problem on TV. The dramatic silhouetted interviews and fast-paced delivery make it less glaring. As a writer, I believe it works less effectively.

Lumley criticized the network's reporting in other emails, stating that it was "not ready for prime time" and that it was "not clear from the story whether anyone who pays these people ever gets out." He also called the entire report "pretty flawed."

Lumley argued that he was criticizing the print version of the report, not the TV broadcast, when he said it was "not ready for prime time."

Lumley testified that since she was not responsible for the TV piece, she had the right to express her opinion, but if she had read the piece and found a major issue, she would have spoken up.

Freedman shot back, "I think you did say something."

The jury was presented with additional internal CNN messages, including Lumley referring to the report as "a piece of crap" and Marquardt being "angry" due to the criticism. In another message, Marquardt stated that the Alex story was a "mess" and may not be "easily salvageable."

Lumley stated that the message made him feel "frustrated" and he didn't believe the version that was aired on CNN's "The Lead with Jake Tapper" should be published online.

"Lumley wrote to CNN colleague Trimble, "The story is full of holes like Swiss cheese," to which Trimble responded, "I agree – the story is 80% emotion, 20% obscured fact lol.""

Lumley was asked by Freedman if an "obscured fact" is a "lie," but the CNN editor had difficulty responding.

He testified that he couldn't speak for Mrs. Trimble.

Jake Tapper's "The Lead" was not the only CNN show to air the report.

Although Lumley admitted that the "fundamental question" he wanted to answer couldn't be found in time for the digital report, he remained committed to his story when questioned on the witness stand, despite his internal criticism.

Lumley stated that while it may not be his preferred story from a storytelling standpoint, it is still a fair and accurate account.

During cross-examination, CNN attorney David Axelrod questioned Lumley about his "full of holes like Swiss cheese" comment. Lumley responded by calling it "imprecise language" and stating that the "one hole" he was primarily concerned about was the future of the Afghans.

He stated that he would never publish a story that he believed was inaccurate or unjust.

The trial resumes on Wednesday and will stream live on Planet Chronicle Digital.

Planet Chronicle Digital’s Nikolas Lanum contributed to this report.