Sharon Lawyer Gives Closing Arguments : Charges That Time Magazine Told a ‘Flagrant, Outrageous Lie’

The chief attorney for former Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon in his $50- million libel trial against Time magazine charged in closing arguments Friday that Time told a “flagrant, outrageous lie” about Sharon in a reckless attempt to “turn a great man into a bad man.”

In a 6 1/2-hour, fist-pounding and often sarcastic address, Sharon’s attorney, Milton Gould, told the jury that “its verdict will go a long way in (deciding) whether Ariel Sharon will go down . . . in the history of the Western World as a great man, a great soldier . . . or on the basis of lies and vicious speculation (by the magazine) as a kind of monster.”

Gould’s closing arguments concluded summations in the two-month-old trial, which has received wide press attention here and in Israel.

Verdict Must Be Unanimous

U.S. District Judge Abraham D. Sofaer is scheduled to instruct the jury on Monday and then give the six-person panel the case for deliberation. The jurors’ verdict must be unanimous.

The case focuses on a paragraph in a 1983 Time magazine cover story that Sharon claims falsely accused him of consciously permitting or actively encouraging the massacre of more than 700 Palestinian refugees by Lebanese Falangist militia in September, 1982.

Gould centered much of his argument on the Time correspondent chiefly responsible for the disputed paragraph, David Halevy, whom he described as “an irresponsible liar” who, “in a feverish chase for sensation” invented a story “to make a few more bucks for Time.”

Notes Discrepancies

The attorney noted several discrepancies between Halevy’s testimony and that of others, as well as differences in Halevy’s deposition and trial testimony about his sources for the story.

To convince the jury that the disputed paragraph indeed has the condemnatory meaning Sharon alleges, Gould relied heavily on a Halevy memo on which the story was based. Halvey had titled the memo “Green Light,” and Time editors later changed it to “Green Light for Revenge.”

In his efforts to win the jury, Gould made heavy use of sarcasm, depicting the Time staff as “smooth faced Boy Scouts from Avenue of the Americas (the Manhattan street where Time’s office is located).

Gould countered Time’s efforts to portray Halevy as a courageous military hero and battlefield correspondent by calling war correspondents “guys in their trench coats (who) hang around with each other in bars.”

‘He Ain’t Crazy’

Gould also argued that Sharon must be telling the truth and Time lying, because it would otherwise have been insanity to bring the libel suit and risk further public humiliation. “He’d have to be crazy and his lawyers would have to be a bunch of suicidal maniacs,” he said. Making the point earlier, Gould said, “Ariel Sharon may be fat, but he ain’t crazy.”

Gould, 75, appeared to tire in the last hour of his summation, his voice growing hoarse and his delivery sometimes halting. He began flipping through the last pages of his outline and skipping items. The judge interrupted to correct Gould on an error of fact, and then asked the attorney to “wind it up.”

Sharon sat through most of Friday’s summation with arms folded and flanked by aides, U.S. marshals and Israeli security guards. His wife, Lili, sat beside him, dressed in a white cashmere sweater Friday, in contrast to the black she wore Thursday for Time’s summation.

Also Friday, Time spokesman Michael Luftman responded to a Los Angeles Times report that Sharon on Wednesday had rejected a statement of partial retraction by the magazine, confirming that the retraction was to have been the “foundation of a settlement.” He also disclosed that the settlement did not include any monetary remuneration to Sharon.