Navy veteran's heavy pursuit by CNN reporter downplayed in defamation trial.

In Panama City, Florida, CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt was questioned on Monday about his extensive attempts to uncover information on the Navy veteran suing CNN for defamation, contradicting CNN's argument that the plaintiff, Zachary Young, was not the main focus of the report at the center of the lawsuit.

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

In Bay County Court, Marquardt testified during the second week of the trial, with CNN's lead counsel David Axelrod arguing that Young was a minor player in the segment, while Freedman, the plaintiff's attorney, presented evidence suggesting that Marquardt was actively pursuing Young.

Last week, during the trial, CNN's legal team presented the video segment to the jury. Axelrod frequently paused the video and emphasized that certain parts were not related to Young. He highlighted that Young was not mentioned until later in the report, implying that the story focused on the general exploitation of Afghans, despite Young being the only person mentioned.

On October 28, 2021, Marquardt emailed CNN executives about a story that included Young. Despite this, Young was not contacted by CNN until days later and was not informed that he was part of the story until Marquardt informed him on November 10, 2021, the day before the CNN report aired. Young previously testified that he would have called a lawyer immediately if he knew he was the focus of a story.

Marquardt admitted he started investigating the story because he wanted to examine Young's actions. Freedman then presented a recording of Marquardt speaking to a source about Young and displayed an email exchange from the CNN correspondent asking, "Have you heard of Zachary Young?" The jury viewed an internal message from Marquardt stating he viewed Young's LinkedIn profile a million times, but Marquardt explained those were attempts to unsuccessfully search for Young's profile on the platform.

Marquardt wrote, "I am gathering evidence of this business, of these scams. I want to expose them," after asking about Young, as shown by Freedman to the jury.

Marquardt replied, "That's correct, Freedman. I couldn't find any evidence that Young was guilty of a crime."

"Correct," Marquardt answered.

Marquardt stated that he took advantage of the general situation but had no evidence that Young took money from any individual Afghans. The court ruled that Young did not commit any illegal acts.

Marquardt was accused by Freedman of altering his testimony from his deposition, where he stated that he had no evidence Young exploited Afghans. As a result, Marquardt slightly modified his statement.

Young claimed that Marquardt denied doing a "hit piece" on him.

"I had no intention of harming anyone. I did not cause any harm," Marquardt stated.

Despite Katie Bo Lillis' request to speak with Young to learn about evacuations for a larger story, Marquardt had planned on making Young the focus of his story.

Marquardt's message to Freedman, which he shared with his source who had animosity towards Young, stated that the published CNN report was not as harsh on Young as he had hoped, but that was the outcome.

Marquardt was informed by a CNN source that parasites can be difficult to eliminate, to which he responded with a noncommittal "Yeah."

The now-infamous exchange between Marquardt and a CNN colleague was shown to the jury by Freedman, where Marquardt said, "We gonna nail this Zachary Young mf----r," to which the colleague replied, "Gonna hold you to that one cowboy!"

Maybe he just slips away.

Marquardt recounted his conversation with a CNN colleague the day the report aired, where the colleague told him that Young had a "punchable face." Marquardt replied "right?" to the colleague's statement. During his testimony, Marquardt clarified that he was only acknowledging what he said and being agreeable, not actually agreeing with the statement.

Marquardt maintained that CNN had no ill will towards Young after Freedman presented a message to the jury in which he wrote, "It’s your funeral bucko," when referring to Young's pricing. Later, Marquardt clarified that he was referring to Young's lack of transparency regarding his pricing, which he believed raised "suspicion" and could negatively impact Young's reputation.

According to Marquardt, nobody from CNN informed Young that the story would include "black market" dealings. During most of the segment, CNN's on-screen chyron read: "AFGHANS FACE BLACK MARKETS, EXORBITANT FEES, NO GUARANTEE OF SAFETY OR SUCCESS."

Freedman referenced the dictionary definition of "black market," which defines it as "an illegal traffic or trade in officially controlled or scarce commodities," in response to Marquardt's argument that the term doesn't accurately describe Young's actions.

Despite CNN offering an on-air apology to Young four months after the segment initially ran, Marquardt maintains his stance on his report and states that he was not consulted about the apology but was given a "heads up." He added that he didn't think an apology was necessary but was "fine" with it.

Marquardt maintained that the questions he posed to Young were "simple" and that Young's responses would have been included in the report, even if CNN had agreed to postpone its report. However, CNN proceeded with the story because Young did not indicate that he would answer their questions.

Marquardt expressed pride in the report and remains confident in his work.

During the all-day testimony, Marquardt maintained that the Navy veteran was not the main concern, despite the focus being on his reporting on Young.

Marquardt stated that he was merely a minor aspect of the narrative.

The trial resumes Tuesday and will be streamed live on Planet Chronicle Digital.