Trump Seeks Urgent Deposition of Murdoch in Epstein Defamation Case

In a significant legal development, former President Donald Trump has formally requested a U.S. court to expedite the deposition of Rupert Murdoch, the CEO of News Corp, as part of his ongoing defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal. The case, filed in response to a July 17 article, asserts that Trump was linked to Jeffrey Epstein through a purported birthday greeting, which the lawsuit claims is false and damaging to his reputation.

The article in question alleged that Trump sent a sexually suggestive card to Epstein in 2003, a claim that Trump has vehemently denied. According to the filing submitted to U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles, Trump's legal team argues that Murdoch was made aware of the false nature of the card prior to its publication. Trump's attorneys stated, "Murdoch’s direct involvement further underscores defendants’ actual malice," a legal standard that requires proof of knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth.

Trump's request for an expedited deposition seeks to compel Murdoch to testify within 15 days. The judge has ordered Murdoch to respond by August 4. A spokesperson for Dow Jones, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, stated that they plan to vigorously defend against the lawsuit and declined further comment.

The context of this case is heightened by ongoing scrutiny surrounding Trump's past associations with Epstein, particularly amid criticism from both conservative supporters and Democratic lawmakers regarding the lack of transparency from the Justice Department regarding Epstein’s investigation. Epstein, a convicted sex offender, died in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, raising questions about his connections with various public figures, including Trump.

Legal experts highlight the challenges Trump faces in proving defamation, particularly given the high bar set by the actual malice standard. Dr. Linda Roberts, a professor of law at Yale University, remarked, "To prevail, Trump must not only show that the statement was false but also that the Journal acted with actual malice, which is notoriously difficult to prove."

The implications of this case extend beyond Trump’s personal reputation and potentially impact the media's ability to report on public figures. As Dr. James Thompson, a media ethics expert at Columbia University, noted, "This case could set a precedent for how defamation suits are approached, particularly involving powerful individuals and the press."

As this legal saga unfolds, the outcome may influence the dynamics of media reporting and the scrutiny of public figures in the political arena. The court's decision on Murdoch's deposition may come as early as next week, potentially shaping the trajectory of this high-profile case.