Judge Weighs Capitol Protester's $100M CNN Lawsuit

A judge has been requested to grant a default judgment in the defamation lawsuit a Virginia man who entered the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, has filed against CNN.

Jacob Hiles, a charter boat captain from Virginia Beach, sued CNN last year, alleging the network defamed him in an article published on October 15, 2021.

Hiles had pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor count of parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building in September 2021. He was sentenced in December 2021 to two years of probation and ordered to complete 60 hours of community service.

In his lawsuit, Hiles argued that CNN defamed him in an article published on October 15, 2021, with the headline: "US Capitol Police officer indicted on obstruction of justice charges in connection with January 6."

Newsweek has contacted attorneys for Hiles and CNN for comment via email.

The article reported on the indictment of Michael Angelo Riley, a Capitol Police officer who prosecutors said messaged Hiles on Facebook and encouraged him to delete his posts. Riley was sentenced to two years of probation and four months of home detention earlier this year after being convicted on one count of obstruction of justice.

The article's focus later shifts to Hiles, with a subheading that reads: "Man wanted to start 'a revolution' on January 6." According to an FBI affidavit, Hiles posted numerous videos and photos on his Facebook page on the day supporters of then-President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol building. The posts included a selfie he shared that morning with the caption: "Feelin cute...might start a revolution later."

Hiles' lawsuit alleged that the subheading and the article's contents were defamatory because "they falsely accuse Hiles of felonious criminal activity of which he was not charged or convicted, either directly or indirectly."

He was initially seeking $37 million in compensatory damages but is now seeking $100 million.

In a filing on Sunday, Hiles' attorneys have repeated their request for Judge Arenda Wright Allen—an appointee of former President Barack Obama—to enter a default judgment against CNN in the case.

A default judgment is granted by a judge or court in favor of a plaintiff when the defendant in a legal case fails to respond to a court summons or does not appear in court.

Hiles' attorneys first made the request in a filing earlier this month, alleging CNN's counsel had not complied with Virginia Local Rule 7(E), which required its attorneys to "set the motion for hearing or arrange with opposing counsel for submission of the motion without oral argument" within 30 days of filing their motion.

CNN's attorneys responded to that request by arguing that there "is no basis to enter default" because CNN filed a "timely" motion to dismiss Hiles' amended complaint.

In Sunday's filing in the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Hiles' attorneys accused CNN of "dilatory tactics"—when a party abuses rules of legal procedure in a bid to delay the progress of proceedings.

Attorneys for CNN are seeking "to blame the results of its own dilatory tactics and inattention on Plaintiff by further arguing that Plaintiff waived any right to enforce Local Rule 7(E) and cannot suddenly 'ambush' Defendant months later by requesting the clerk enter a default after Defendant continued to not participate in this litigation—and, by its own admission, did so intentionally," Hiles' attorneys wrote in the new filing.

They wrote that CNN's attorneys spent "most" of their recent filing "attempting to paint Plaintiff in bad light and make it appear as though Plaintiff suffered no harm due to Defendant's deliberate delay."

Hiles' attorneys said that CNN "also makes clear that it refuses to accept any responsibility for the consequences of its own bad-faith tactics" and "fails to address or proffer any evidence of a meritorious defense that is necessary to establish 'good cause' for the Court to even begin considering whether the impending default should be set aside."

Hiles "suffered significant prejudice" as the article "remains posted on Defendant's website, which is accessed by hundreds of millions of internet users each day who can and have both read this article during the pendency of this case as well as shared it on other online platforms," Hiles' attorneys wrote.

CNN "knowingly caused this harm by deliberately sitting on the filing now at issue," they wrote.

Update: 4/30/24 12:10 p.m. ET: The headline was changed.