Ep. 10 | Nine Million Dollar Mann

Climate Change on Trial

Unreported Story Society

Science

4.9 • 942 Ratings

🗓️ 1 February 2024

⏱️ 70 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Has Michael Mann’s case collapsed? Is the trial over before the defendants even present a witness? It was a drama-filled day in court as Mark Steyn and his co-defendant’s lawyers urged the judge to dismiss the case. They claimed, and the judge appeared to agree, that Mann and his lawyers had failed to submit the allegedly defamatory articles to the jury. Was the case about to collapse on a technicality?

The judge also heard that Mann had failed to prove that the articles were damaging to his reputation, or even that he had suffered any injury. Apart from a mean stare in a supermarket, does Michael Mann have any proof he was damaged by the Steyn and Simberg articles? Or was he damaged by his “ClimateGate” emails, as his own witness accidentally blurted out? And did Mann’s lawyers present a false document to the jury?

And then you can hear one of America’s foremost data experts describe how Mann “manipulated” the figures to get a Hockey Stick

We await the judge's decision on whether to dismiss the case before it even gets to the jury.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Hello and I'm Phila McElhaney.
0:05.0	This is a daily podcast from inside the DC defamation trial of writer and broadcaster Mark Stein. Stein has been sued for
0:15.9	defamation by climate scientist Professor Michael Mann. Stein described Mann's famous hockey stick
0:22.0	graph as a fraud.
0:24.0	Mann is also suing writer Ran Simburg who made similar comments.
0:28.0	So we're presenting the podcast in a very special way by having actors reenact court transcripts verbatim so you get the most
0:35.2	exciting exchanges from the court every day. So welcome to climate change on trial
0:40.5	day 10, the $9 million man.
0:45.5	So, Phelum, I wasn't able to be in the court this morning as you know,
0:49.1	and of course, you know, the minute I walk out the door basically,
0:52.2	the millisecond I'm not there there's a total bombshell over to you
0:56.1	Philip what happened when I when I when I wasn't there well it looked like the case was over before
1:02.2	the defense even got to begin their defense.
1:05.4	Michael Mann's case closed, the plaintiff, he is suing, the burden of proof is on him,
1:11.8	and he closed and then almost pro forma,
1:15.0	there's always often a application to the judge
1:18.0	to dismiss the charges because of lack of evidence.
1:21.4	As I say, that's pro forma. and I've heard it a lot in courtrooms but I heard
1:25.9	something today that I never heard in a courtroom before. Stein and Simberg's lawyers claimed, and the judge seemed to agree, claimed that man's lawyers
1:38.6	had never entered the original of allegedly offensive and defamatory articles into evidence.
1:46.0	People had talked about them, people had read, parts of them, people put them on screen,
1:50.0	but no one had ever said, this is the actual actual article can we enter it as an exhibit and I was speaking to a lawyer about it and the lawyer said well it's like
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Unreported Story Society, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Unreported Story Society and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.