Eramo sought $7.5 million and claimed that the article was defamatory towards her, for portraying her as not handling Jackie’s situation properly. The court deemed that for the purpose of the case, Eramo was considered a public figure, which meant that she had to prove that the false story was published with “actual malice,” a legal term that means that there was knowledge that the story was false, or reckless disregard for whether it was true. Rolling Stone’s attorneys argued that had they known the weakness in the story, the magazine would not have published it.
The jury deliberated for two days before ultimately ruling in Eramo’s favor. It remains to be seen how much money she will receive.
Rolling Stone issued the following statement after the verdict was announced, as reported by Sydney Ember of The New York Times:
[Image via 360b/Shutterstock]