Alabama Jury Orders New York Times to Pay $9.25 Million for Falsely Linking Player to Fatal Shooting

A federal jury in Tuscaloosa, Alabama ordered the New York Times to pay $9.25 million to Kai Spears, a former University of Alabama basketball player the paper falsely linked to a fatal 2023 shooting.

The eight-person jury reached its verdict Thursday after a nine-day trial in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, deliberating just over five hours, according to Patch. Jurors found the Times liable for both defamation and false light invasion of privacy.

Most of the award, roughly $7.5 million, came as punitive damages, Patch reported.

The Error

The case traces back to a March 15, 2023 article by Times sportswriter Billy Witz. The story covered the January 2023 shooting death of Jamea Harris, a 23-year-old mother, near the University of Alabama campus.

Witz's article identified Spears, then an 18-year-old freshman walk-on, as the passenger in a car with Crimson Tide star Brandon Miller at the scene of the shooting, according to Fox News. That was false. The person actually in the car was Cooper Lee, a student manager for the team, not Spears.

Witz testified he relied on a single anonymous source he described as a "high-level person, professional" with access to case transcripts, videos and impound photos, according to Fox News.

Alabama's athletic director and Spears's own father denied Spears was present as soon as the story ran. The Times included those denials in the piece but did not retract or correct the false identification at that time, according to the paper's own June 2023 editor's note cited by Fox News.

The correction only came after Spears filed his lawsuit. The Times' editor's note stated that "based on information from a person familiar with the case," the paper had misidentified Spears, and that further reporting after the lawsuit determined Cooper Lee was the person actually in the car.

Both Sides on the Record

Matt Glover, an attorney for Spears, said he believes "this verdict will improve journalism throughout the country," according to the Associated Press.

Spears' father, Christian Spears, told Patch the family's goal from the start was simple: a retraction. "Instead, the Times defended its inaccurate article and continued to distort facts rather than acknowledge the harm they caused, acting as if its power made it untouchable," he said. He added that the jury's verdict shows "no institution, regardless of power or reach, is above accountability."

Kai Spears, in comments to Patch after the verdict, thanked his legal team and said he hopes the outcome "will help protect others like him."

The Times disputes the verdict. Spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander said in a statement carried by the AP: "We're disappointed the jury found The Times liable for an honest mistake. We thank the jury for its service, but believe the verdict and award of damages are contrary to law and not supported by the evidence."

That's the Times' actual defense on the record: this was an honest mistake, based on a source who had access to underlying case materials, corrected once new information surfaced. The paper is reviewing its legal options, according to Stadtlander, and an appeal is expected.

The Times is not arguing that Spears was actually present, and it isn't disputing that it printed a false identification. Its position is that relying on a source who claimed direct knowledge of the case file was reasonable reporting practice, not reckless disregard for the truth, and that a jury shouldn't be second-guessing a good-faith editorial process after the fact.

Legal Significance

According to the Times' own reporting on its loss, cited by the AP, the paper had not lost a defamation lawsuit brought in the United States over one of its articles in more than 50 years. Patch noted the last comparable marker was New York Times Co. v. Sullivan in 1964, when the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously overturned a defamation judgment against the paper and set the modern "actual malice" standard that public figures must meet to win defamation suits.

Spears, as a college athlete rather than a household-name public figure, would have faced a different, lower bar than the Sullivan standard requires for genuine public officials or celebrities, which may partly explain why this case reached a jury verdict where so many others against the Times have not.

Three other basketball players were actually present at the January 2023 shooting that killed Harris, according to the AP. None of the source reporting here disputes that fact or that the underlying case was legitimate news. The dispute was narrowly about which specific person the Times named.

The Times has not said whether it will appeal to the Eleventh Circuit or when a notice of appeal might be filed. Punitive damage awards of this size are frequently challenged on constitutional grounds in post-trial motions, and Stadtlander's statement that the verdict is "contrary to law" signals that fight is coming next.