Michael Mann is suing Mark Steyn, claiming damages. This comes after a previous failed action against Canadian professor Tim Ball for defamation. The general opinion of experts following the Steyn trial is that it could be over before the defendants even present a witness? It was a drama-filled day in court as Mark Steyn and his co-defendant’s lawyers urged the judge to dismiss the case. They have claimed, and the judge appeared to agree, that Mann and his lawyers had failed to submit the allegedly defamatory articles to the jury.

Mann Versus Steyn

Was the case about to collapse on a technicality? The judge also heard that Mann had failed to prove that the articles were damaging to his reputation, or even that he had suffered any injury. Apart from a mean stare in a supermarket, does Michael Mann have any proof he was damaged by the Steyn and Simberg articles? Or was he damaged by his “ClimateGate” emails, as his own witness accidentally blurted out? And did Mann’s lawyers present a false document to the jury?And then you can hear one of America’s foremost data experts describe how Mann “manipulated” the figures to get a Hockey Stick. We await the judge’s decision on whether to dismiss the case before it even gets to the jury

Professor Tim Ball, who was sued by Michael Mann for defamation regarding comments he made about the integrity of the Hockey Stick Graph, had succeeded in having the case thrown out and Mann ordered to pay costs. He had failed to comply with a court order that he produce his Hockey Stick Data! The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) produced evidence in the form of Mann’s Hockey Stick Graph, in their 2001 report, published eleven  years after the ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report (1) 1990  page 202, showing the MWP and the Littel Ice Age  that had been removed see original diagram below.