Nate Raymond

(Reuters] – A Manhattan federal judge said he will dismiss Sarah Palin’s defamation case against the New York Times while jurors still deliberated. This unusual action was made by a Manhattan federal Judge. Palin is known for his controversies with Wall Street regulators as well as criticisms of U.S. sentencing policies.

After concluding her attorneys had not proved that Palin was maliced by linking the paper to an incorrectly linked mass shooting, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff (78) announced that he would dismiss Palin’s case.

Rakoff stated that he will still allow jurors to reach their verdict in the case of former Alaska Governor and 2008 Republican U.S. Vice Presidential candidate. He expected her appeal so the timing was unusual.

Rakoff didn’t immediately reply to an email requesting comment. In the middle of a trial, judges are not known to speak with the media.

Rakoff is known by lawyers and said that his decision was safe. Palin might still get a jury verdict, which could be reversed on appeal. That would negate the need to retrial.

“If the facts that were presented at trial demonstrate that they didn’t meet the legal standard, he would not be shy, nor should he be, in dismissing the case,” said Carrie Cohen, a former federal prosecutor in Manhattan.

Rakoff is a former Democratic President Bill Clinton appointee and joined the Federal Bench in 1996 as a federal prosecutor. He was also a defense attorney.

His reputation among lawyers is that of a smart, efficient judge. He was able to maintain an active court docket, with high-profile cases and a challenging trial schedule, even though he had taken senior status.

Rakoff was referred to by Stephen Gillers as a New York University School of Law professor and friend. Gillers called Rakoff an “intellectually autonomous” judge, who relies on his intuitions.

CASES HIGHLY PROFILE

Rakoff, in one of his most famous rulings, declared 2002 the federal death penalty illegal, stating that it creates “an undue danger of execution innocent people”. Later, he was reversed in appeal.

Rakoff claimed that he made the ruling even though he had previously enthusiastically supported the death penalty after the murder of his elder brother in the Philippines. The killer was sentenced to a three year term.

This iconoclastic judge is a long-standing critic of federal sentencing guidelines that judges use to determine a sentence for defendants. He also blasts the lengthy sentences for fraud defendants.

His efforts to ignite a controversy over the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s long-standing policy of allowing defendants in civil proceedings without admitting guilt have led him at times to be a troublemaker for them.

He refused to accept the $285 million settlement relating to financial crisis with SEC in 2011. Citigroup Inc (NYSE:). Rakoff stated at that time that he didn’t know whether the agreement was in the public interests.

2. United States. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Rakoff had abused its discretion. However, Mary Jo White, the then Chair of the SEC, had already adopted a policy that required admissions in certain instances, but not all.