And Mann receive $1 in compensatory damages which will cause the $1M punitive to be vastly reduced, possibly to the point where Mann will lose money.
There wasn't any 'winning' this case, his co-defendant compared Mann to Sandusky, and Mark re-attributed it, thus both overcame Sullivan.
Yet for Steyn to be able to ably pillory Mann in open court, to exponentiate Mann's humiliation with not just the facts but Mark's extraordinary displays of oratory, do you actually believe for one millisecond that a courthouse gun-for-hire would have accomplished that?
“his co-defendant compared Mann to Sandusky”
No. He used Sandusky as an ANALOGY. It is a bit like saying, “Biden is like Hitler in XXXXX”. It isn’t saying he IS Hitler, or that he does the exact same thing as Hitler, but that in some way there are similarities.
As I understand it, that is what happened here. They said “the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except for instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data...”. So the ONLY thing they accused him of was torturing DATA. They did not in any way accuse him of being a child molester. It is COMMON for “scientists” to be accused of torturing data because so many DO torture the data. I read a lot of papers that should never have seen the light of day.
That doesn’t “defame” someone. It indicates strong disagreement. That is all.