Jonathan Stempel and Jody Gooy

NEW YORK (Reuters), A former editor of The New York Times’ editorial page was taken to task Tuesday by Sarah Palin in a defamation suit against Sarah Palin over an inaccurate 2017 editorial linking the Republican vice presidential candidate, Alaska governor and an earlier Arizona mass shooting.

James Bennet, the ex-editor, said in testimony on the fourth day of the trial that he had relied upon the research of colleagues and added language to make it seem like Palin’s political committee could have incited the Arizona shootings in 2011.

Six people were killed and Gabby Giffords, a former U.S. Representative was severely wounded by the shooting.

Following a shooting at Virginia’s ball practice where Steve Scalise was hurt, an editorial about gun control followed.

Bennet said to Palin’s attorney Shane Vogt, “I was worried… that this didn’t seem so big deal anymore.” It seemed like an enormous deal that several Republican Congressmen had been killed, and that’s why I wanted to bring our readers’ attention.

The trial tests legal protections, which for decades have safeguarded U.S. Media from claims of defamation by public figures.

Palin’s lawyers have accused The Times of trying falsely to smear her. In addition, they questioned other Times journalists on the writing and editing processes.

Palin, 57 years old, indicated she might appeal against the 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case in New York Times v Sullivan.

She is trying to prove that Bennet and the Times acted with “actual malice,” https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-new-york-times-palin-idUKKBN25O31B a high standard adopted in the Sullivan decision, meaning they knew the editorial was false or had reckless disregard for the truth.

Bennet, a Times reporter at the top of his profession, is expected to testify.

Elizabeth Williamson was the original editor of the editorial. She mentioned Palin’s political action committee’s distribution of a map just before the Giffords shooting, which placed the Congresswoman and 19 other Democrats in a crosshairs.

Bennet clarified that the link to incitement political was obvious and stated that incitement at the Scalise shooting wasn’t as apparent as it was in the Giffords.

The Times corrected the error and stated that there wasn’t a link.

DO NOT SHIFTING THE BLAME

Bennet stated that while he originally intended to take notes to give to Williamson, he changed his mind and requested she “please have a look at” the documents.

“I was worried that the piece would not be completed on time…. And I’ve just started to edit the piece,” he stated. I’m not trying to shift blame.

Vogt tried to show that shortly after the editorial’s late evening publication, Bennet learned from Times colleague Ross Douthat and Twitter (NYSE:) posts that the wording might be problematic, but waited until the next morning to ask staff to look into it.

Bennet said the Times had a policy against taking down published pieces, and noted that the editorial was already running in the print edition.

Later, he apologized to newspaper board.

He said, “I was not asked to do this. There just happened to be meeting.” Although I’m not sure if it qualifies for a reprimand or not, it seemed like one.

Bennet stated that the Times has a policy of not apologizing to journalists for errors in corrections. These are extremely painful and would make it “meaningless” for them.

Bennet was asked if he apologized for his actions to Palin.

Linda Cohn was a former Times editor who testified Tuesday that she has never heard Bennet speak negatively about Palin and initially seemed surprised when he learned that some people had been upset by the editorial’s words.

“There was an overall sense of ‘oh No,’ she stated.

Palin was John McCain’s running mate during the 2008 U.S. presidency election and Alaska’s governor between 2006-2009.

On Wednesday, Bennet is expected to continue his testimony. His own lawyers have not yet questioned him. Palin will also be expected to give evidence at the trial.