Navy veteran's case against CNN: Expert witnesses testify

Last week, in the ongoing CNN defamation trial, expert witnesses testified in court, marking the end of the first week of the legal battle.

CNN accused Young of profiting illegally from desperate people trying to flee Afghanistan after the Biden administration's military withdrawal, implying he was involved in "black market" dealings and damaged his professional reputation.

Major Gen. James V. Young, an expert witness, stated that he believed the plaintiff's evacuation prices for corporations were "reasonable" after CNN characterized them as "exorbitant."

Maj. Gen. Young stated, "We couldn't have accomplished what we did without payment."

Maj. Gen. Young stated that he would have hired the plaintiff if he had working relationships with high-profile intelligence leaders such as Leon Panetta and Jeremy Bash, who were listed as leaders of a project Young testified to having worked on. However, after the CNN report, he testified that he wouldn't have hired him.

Maj. Gen. Young stated that someone like this would be too risky for our operation to be associated with.

Maj. Gen. Young was questioned by CNN's lead counsel David Axelrod about whether he had inquired about the plaintiff's qualifications with anyone in the military or the intelligence community before the trial. He admitted that he had not done so. Additionally, he testified that he had never met or had any knowledge of the plaintiff and was being paid to speak as an expert witness on Zachary Young's behalf.

Richard Bolko, a certified public accountant from Florida, who was hired by Young's legal team to assess his financial losses following the CNN report, estimated that the Navy veteran had lost more than $21 million in income since then.

Bolko's methodology was disputed by Axelrod, who questioned his lack of knowledge about Young's financial prospects and grilled him on it. Additionally, Bolko admitted that there is a lot of "uncertainty" with his own model.

Dr. John Vincent, a clinical psychologist at the University of Houston and an expert witness in Young's case, was paid by his legal team to conduct a "psychological evaluation." Vincent testified that he diagnosed Young with "Major Depressive Disorder" and "Other Specified Trauma and Stressor-Related Disorder," which he attributed to the "impact" of CNN's on-air report.

Following the CNN segment, Young exhibited "panic-related behavior," and during testimony, he stated that he did not believe the plaintiff was exaggerating or faking his trauma.

"Vincent testified that he was really panicking and believes he has been deeply affected by the experience. He still struggles with it to this day."

Axelrod began his cross-examination by emphasizing that Vincent diagnosed Young after CNN published its report in November 2021, and he relied on Young's account of his symptoms.

CNN's lead counsel questioned Vincent about the intent behind Young's legal team hiring him, which was to prove that CNN caused the plaintiff trauma. Vincent acknowledged this intent and also admitted that patients may exaggerate their symptoms when involved in a lawsuit like Young's case against CNN.

Vincent admitted that he had only had a virtual conversation with Young for approximately "four to five hours."

On Monday, the CNN correspondent who led the segment at the center of the defamation case, Alex Marquardt, is anticipated to give testimony.

Last week, a CNN spokesperson stated that they were confident they would have a verdict in their favor once all the facts were revealed during the trial.

The trial is being streamed live on Planet Chronicle Digital.