THIS JUST IN: U.S. Judge William Bertelsman today reversed course and ruled that attorneys for Nick Sandmann could start discovery for a portion of their lawsuit against the Washington Post over its coverage of the so-called Cov Cath incident. It turns out that on reconsideration, the Court found that at least three of the sued-upon statements were both defamatory and the complaint was plausible enough to warrant discovery. The ruling (hidden behind PACER paywall) which revives the case, states that:

“The Court also notes that the proposed First Amended Complaint makes specific allegations concerning the state of mind of [Nathan] Phillips, the principal source of these statements. It alleges in greater detail than the original complaint that Phillips deliberately lied concerning the events at issue, and that he had an unsavory reputation which, but for the defendant’s negligence or malice, would have alerted defendant to this fact.”

Seems to me the Post has three options: 1) continue to publicly slime the teen; 2) admit they were in a rush to publish and took the word of a less-than trustworthy source (shades of Rolling Stone’s “Jackie”!) or 3) fight in court till the last dog is hanged and try to grind them down to settlement by attrition and financial exhaustion.

More to come, I’m sure.