Climate scientist Michael Mann won his defamation case against two conservative writers, who accused him of manipulating data and compared him with a convicted child molester.
Climate scientist Michael Mann was awarded over a million dollars in punitive damages.
A jury in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia found the defendants—Rand Simberg, a former adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Mark Steyn, a National Review contributor—guilty of defaming Mann by making several false statements in a blog post and an article published in 2012.
The jury ruled that each writer would pay $1 to the scientist for compensatory damages, in addition to Steyn paying $1 million and Simberg paying $1,000 in punitive damages for “maliciousness, spite, ill will, vengeance or deliberate intent to harm,” according to the New York Times.
Steyn’s representative told the Associated Press he plans to appeal the $1 million award Simberg’s attorney also said he was disappointed with the ruling and will appeal the decision.
In a statement, Mann said he hoped the verdict would send a message “that falsely attacking climate scientists is not protected speech.”
Mann’s lawyer Pete Fontaine said: “Today's verdict vindicates Mike Mann's good name and reputation. It also is a big victory for truth and scientists everywhere who dedicate their lives answering vital scientific questions impacting human health and the planet.”
In 2012, Simberg wrote a blog for the libertarian think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute while serving as a fellow. Simberg’s blog compared the climate scientist to convicted child molester and former college football coach Jerry Sandusky saying: “Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except for instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data.” Simberg’s comments were about an investigation into Mann’s research from 2009 where skeptics had raised doubts about his “hockey stick” graph on rising global temperatures. Although investigations by Penn State and others found no wrongdoing or manipulation of data, Mann continued to remain a target of conservative ire. Steyn later published a piece in the National Review, referencing Simberg’s blog and called Mann the “man behind the fraudulent climate-change ‘hockeystick’ graph, the very ringmaster of the tree-ring circus.”
Michael Mann, a Leading Climate Scientist, Wins His Defamation Suit (New York Times)
Jury awards climate scientist Michael Mann $1 million in defamation lawsuit (Associated Press)