NY Post Murray Weiss, Reporter Deposition: defamation / libel Lawsuit against New York Post

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YORK

-------------------------------------x

GARY SUSON, :

Plaintiff, :

-against- :

NYP HOLDINGS, INC., NEWS AMERICAN :

INCORPORATED, CYNTHIA R. FAGAN, :

MURRAY WEISS, STEPHANIE GASKELL, and :

JOHN DOES 1 AND 2, :

Defendants. :

-------------------------------------x

May 16, 2007

9:30 a.m.

Deposition of MURRAY WEISS,

taken by Counsel for the Plaintiff, held at the

Law Offices of Jared M. Lefkowitz, 48 Wall Street,

New York, New York, before Susan B. Ratner, a

Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and

for the State of New York.

REPORTERS CENTRAL * (212) 594-3582

3

A P P E A R A N C E S:

LAW OFFICES OF JARED M. LEFKOWITZ

Attorneys for the Plaintiff

48 Wall Street

New York, New York 10005

BY: JARED M. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ.

HOGAN & HARTSON, LLP

Attorneys for the Defendants

875 Third Avenue

New York, New York 10022

BY: JASON P. CONTI, ESQ.

ALSO PRESENT:

GARY SUSON


4

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by

and between the attorneys for the respective

parties herein, that filing and sealing be

and the same are hereby waived.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that

all objections, except as to the form of the

question, shall be reserved to the time of

the trial.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that

the within deposition may be sworn to and

signed before any officer authorized to

administer an oath, with the same force and

effect as if signed and sworn to before the

Court.


5 Murray Weiss - Rough Draft

M U R R A Y W E I S S,

called as a witness, having been first duly

sworn by the Notary Public (Susan B. Ratner),

stating his business address at New York

Post, 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York,

New York 10036, was examined and testified as

follows:

EXAMINATION BY

MR. LEFKOWITZ:

Q. Good morning.

A. Good morning.

Q. Have you ever given a deposition before?

A. Yes.

Q. How many times?

A. I believe twice.

Q. When was the first time that you gave a

deposition?

A. The late 1990s maybe.

Q. Were you a party in that lawsuit?

A. No.

Q. Were you a witness?

A. I don't know how to describe myself.

Q. Who were the parties to the lawsuit?

A. I think a gentleman named Lawrence



Flynn. He was the major general in charge of the

New York National Guard.

I think at that point he maybe wasn't

any longer and he had --

MR. CONTI: He is just asking for the

parties to that lawsuit.

THE WITNESS: I am sorry.

A. That is one party and then I guess the

Post.

Q. Did you testify in connection with your

being an employee of the Post?

A. Yes.

Q. What was the nature of that lawsuit?

A. There was an article written that he had

some concerns over.

Q. What kind of concerns?

A. He was concerned that there was an

inaccuracy in it. That is what he was concerned

about.

Q. What were the claims in the lawsuit?

Was it a libel lawsuit or something else?

A. I don't know actually.

Q. You said that this was in the 1990s?

A. Uh-huh.



MR. CONTI: You have to say yes or no.

Q. You have to say yes or no.

A. What was the question?

MR. CONTI: You did not give an audible

answer.

You have to give an audible answer for

the court reporter.

THE WITNESS: Can I get the question

again?

(Question read.)

A. Yes, correct.

Q. Was there a trial in that lawsuit?

(At this time, Mr. Suson entered the

deposition room.)

A. No.

Q. Did it settle?

A. No.

Q. What was the resolution?

A. I think it was dismissed, dropped,

whatever term you want.

Q. Favorably for the Post or favorably for

the other side?

A. For the Post.

Q. What was the second time that you were



involved in a deposition?

A. I recently gave a deposition in regards

to an action involving a town upstate that cut

some trees of mine down.

Q. This was involving your personal

property?

A. Correct.

Q. When is the first time that you heard

the name "Gary Suson" or the "Ground Zero Museum

Workshop"?

A. What is the question?

Q. When is the first time that you heard

the name "Gary Suson" or the "Ground Zero Museum

Workshop"?

A. I don't remember the first time.

Q. About when would it be?

A. It was about the day before we published

an article about him.

Q. So you had never heard of Gary Suson

before, approximately, August 30th of 2005?

A. Correct.

Q. Would you please tell me a little bit

about your educational background after high

school.



Did you go to college?

A. Yes.

Q. Where did you go?

A. Queens College.

Q. What year did you graduate?

A. '73.

Q. What degree did you get?

A. A bachelor with an honors major in

philosophy.

Q. Did you have any advanced degrees after

college?

A. No.

Q. Did you ever study journalism anywhere?

A. No.

Q. Do you consider yourself --

A. While in college, no.

Q. I said anywhere.

Did you ever study journalism anywhere?

A. I have 32 years in the --

MR. CONTI: Let's slow down.

Listen to the question and answer the

question.

THE WITNESS: What is the question?

(Question read.)



A. Academically?

Q. Yes.

A. No.

Q. Did you study journalism in any other

way?

A. Academically, no.

Q. I am not talking about academically.

I am saying, in any other way other than

academically, did you study journalism?

A. I have a 32-year career in journalism.

Q. So you consider yourself to be a

journalist?

A. I do.

Q. Other than merely the experience of

being a journalist for those many years, do you

have any other study or have you taken any other

courses or anything like that in journalism?

A. No.

I taught a course in journalism.

MR. CONTI: That is not the question.

Listen to the question.

A. The answer is no.

Q. Where did you teach a course in

journalism?

A. At The New School.

Q. When was that?

A. Fifteen years ago.

Q. All right.

A. Maybe more.

MR. CONTI: Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

MR. CONTI: Back on the record.

Q. As a journalist, is it -- I am sorry, do

you have a problem?

THE WITNESS: (To Mr. Conti) can I ask

you a question?

MR. CONTI: Do you want to step outside?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

Sorry.

MR. LEFKOWITZ: That is fine.

(At this time, Mr. Conti and the witness

left the deposition room to confer and then

returned.)

Q. Mr. Weiss, do you --

A. I need to add something to an answer to

a question that you asked.

Q. Sure, by all means.

A. I believe you asked me how many times I

was deposed. I mentioned two. There was actual a

third time.

Q. When was that third time?

A. 2004; 2003, 2004.

Q. Were you a party in that lawsuit?

A. No.

Q. Who were the parties?

A. The family of John O'Neill and a woman,

I believe she was the other party, Valerie James.

Q. Who is John O'Neill?

A. John O'Neill was the head of the FBI's

counterterrorism programs for six years leading up

to 9/11 and he was in charge of all of their

efforts to find Osama bin Laden and protect the

United States.

He ultimately died on 9/11 in the World

Trade Center.

Q. What was the nature of your testimony in

that lawsuit?

A. They were asking me about some

information that I wrote in a book I did about Mr.

O'Neill.

Q. I am sorry, you said that this was in

2004?



A. Yes.

Q. As a journalist, have you ever had

occasion to interview witnesses?

A. Yes, I think.

Q. When you interview a witness, do you

take their word for what it is they tell you or do

you seek to find corroborating information?

A. Each case is different. It depends upon

who the witnesses are.

Q. Would you please turn to Exhibit 100.

Have you ever seen this article before

entitled "9/11 Cam 'Scam'"?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you write this article?

A. No.

Q. Did you write the headline?

A. No.

Q. Did you write, I guess it would be, the

second headline, where it says, "Man claims

falsely to be official Ground Zero fotog"?

A. No, sir.

Q. Do you see in the byline it includes

your name, Murray Weiss?

A. Yes.



Q. That is you, right?

A. That is me.

Q. What involvement did you have with

writing this article?

A. I contributed some reporting.

Q. What did you contribute?

A. Are you asking specifically to this

story?

Q. Yes.

A. Several of the quotes in the story.

Q. When you say you contributed to the

reporting with several of the quotes, does that

mean that you interviewed the witnesses who gave

those quotes?

A. Yes.

Q. What else did you do?

A. In connection with the reporting for

this story I interviewed people.

Q. Is that the only thing that you did?

A. I don't remember anything that I did.

Q. Did you do anything other than interview

witnesses?

A. I don't really fully recall.

Q. Did you, for instance, do an Internet



search on Gary Suson?

A. I don't believe I did, but I can't

recall.

Q. Did you ask any reporters at the New

York Post for material they may have on Gary

Suson?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Did you ask the New York Post library

for any information they may have on Gary Suson?

A. I don't believe I did.

Q. Did you read Gary Suson's book?

A. When?

I don't understand.

Q. In connection with your reporting for

this article.

A. On that day, no.

Q. Did you ever read Gary Suson's book?

A. I believe I looked at it.

Q. When was the first time that you looked

at it?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Was it before this article, that is,

Exhibit 200?

A. No.



Q. You are aware that there are several

other articles which are the subject of this

lawsuit, are you not?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you read Gary Suson's book before

any of those other articles were published?

A. I don't believe so.

Q. Did you do an Internet search on Gary

Suson before any of those other articles were

published?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Did you seek information from other New

York Post reporters about Gary Suson before those

articles were published?

A. Repeat the question.

Sorry.

(Question read.)

A. I had conversations with other

reporters.

Q. Who?

A. Cynthia Fagen.

Q. Anyone else?

A. I am not certain.

Q. Did you talk with Stephanie Gaskell?



A. I believe I did.

Q. What did you talk about with Cynthia

Fagen?

A. The subject of this article.

Q. Specifically, what did you talk about?

A. Mr. Suson's museum and his assertions of

having taken pictures at Ground Zero after 9/11.

Q. Anything else?

A. That is fundamentally it.

Q. What about Ms. Gaskell, what did you

talk about with her?

A. I don't really recall.

Q. Did you talk about the story with any of

the editors at the Post?

A. Yes.

Q. Who?

A. I am not sure who.

Q. Did you speak with Gregg Birnbaum?

A. I may have, but I don't recall.

Q. So I guess you would not recall what you

spoke with him about?

A. No.

Q. Did you speak with --

A. I don't recall specifically who I spoke



to.

Q. Did you speak with Jesse Angelo?

A. I might have.

Q. But you are not certain?

A. Not 100 percent, no.

Q. What about David Boyle?

A. I don't believe I spoke to him.

Q. Were there any other copy editors or

employees at the Post that you can recall speaking

to about these stories before they were published?

A. No.

Q. Referring back to Exhibit 100, what are

the quotes in the article that are attributable to

your reporting?

A. I believe the one from Mr. Gribbon.

Q. Would you point that out, as far as

column and paragraph.

A. The first column, next-to-last

paragraph.

MR. CONTI: For the record, why don't

you start to read the sentence.

A. It says, "'No one was authorized to take

artifacts...'".

Q. I am just going to read the whole thing 111

and just ask you a question after that.

The quote is "'No one was authorized to

take artifacts whether they were personal

belongings or dangling from a Dumpster.'"

Is that a quote that you obtained from

Frank Gribbon?

A. I believe so.

Q. When did you speak with Frank Gribbon?

A. The day before this article was

published, I presume, August 30th.

Q. Who asked you to begin working on this

article?

A. Editors on the city desk.

Q. When did they ask you to do that?

A. Sometime in the course of the day.

Q. Which editors asked you to begin working

on this article?

A. As I said, I am not certain which ones

or which one.

Q. What did they ask you to do in terms of

working on this article?

A. They explained the thrust of the story,

the issues and asked me if I would assist in

reporting out the story.



Q. What is the thrust of the story that

they told you to investigate?

A. That Mr. Suson had a museum that had

materials from Ground Zero, that he had taken

photographs and was charging a fee and there were

some concerns, perhaps, about his full rights,

whether all of this was something that he could

and should be doing.

Q. Who had those concerns you mentioned a

moment ago?

A. I am not sure who did.

I was just told that there were some

concerns. I began to look into them.

Q. Did anybody outside of the New York Post

have any concerns?

A. I am not sure who did.

It's clear that the fire department

spokesman says that he does.

Q. Did he say that he did before you called

him in connection with this article?

A. I don't know what he knew before.

Let me say that differently.

I don't know what his concerns were

until I called him.



Q. When you called him, did he answer the

phone right away or did you have to leave a

message and he called you back or how did that

happen?

A. I don't recall.

Q. But you ended up speaking with him the

day before this article was published?

A. Yes.

Q. How many times did you speak with him?

A. I don't recall.

Q. What did you ask him? What questions

did you ask him?

A. I can't say exactly, but I basically

asked if he was aware that Mr. Suson has a museum

and it was clear that he was well aware of

Mr. Suson and this matter.

Q. How was it clear to you that he was well

aware of Mr. Suson and this matter?

A. Judging by his answer.

Q. When you say "this matter," what are you

referring to?

A. I am only using the word "matter"; that

Mr. Suson had a museum, he had taken pictures and

Mr. Gribbon, by my history of being a reporter and



talking to him, I understood from his response

that he knew about this before I called him.

Q. Had you spoken with Mr. Gribbon before

you called him about other subjects?

MR. CONTI: Just --

MR. LEFKOWITZ: Withdrawn.

Q. Prior to this conversation with

Mr. Gribbon, had you ever spoken with him before?

A. Of course.

Q. About how many times?

A. Hundreds and hundreds.

Q. Was that in connection with

investigations for articles?

A. Untold newspaper stories that I work on

that involve the fire department.

Q. Is he somebody that you call on a

regular basis?

A. Yes.

Q. Would you consider yourself to be a

friend of his?

A. I am friendly with him, yes.

Q. Have you socialized with him?

A. A few times, mostly at functions that

involve my work.

Q. What kind of functions?

A. Political dinners, fire department

ceremonies.

Q. Did he tell you what he meant by the

word "artifacts"?

A. No.

Q. Did you ask him?

A. No.

Q. Did you ask him whether other people

besides Gary Suson had removed items from Ground

Zero?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Do you think that that would have been

an important question to ask him?

A. Not necessarily.

Q. So you were just focusing on Gary Suson;

is that right?

A. I don't recall exactly what I focused

on, but this was the focus of our story,

obviously.

Q. When you say "this," what are you

talking about?

A. Mr. Suson and the story that was

published.



Q. So you purposely did not ask about other

people because you were solely concerned with Gary

Suson?

MR. CONTI: Objection to form, but go

ahead and answer.

A. No, that is not true.

I did not purposely not ask about

anything.

I made an inquiry regarding this matter.

I can't recall if I asked about any other people

and that is the sum total of it.

Q. How long did your conversation take?

A. Probably a few minutes.

As I indicated, Mr. Gribbon seemed to be

fully aware --

MR. CONTI: The question was just how

long the conversation took.

Q. What did he say to make you come to the

conclusion that he was fully aware of the

circumstances?

A. As I indicated, he seemed to be -- he

seemed to have knowledge of Mr. Suson and this

matter.

Q. What did he say to make you think that?



A. I quoted him.

He said one or two other things that he

thought Mr. -- that clearly he felt that Mr. Suson

may have done something improper.

Q. What were those other things?

A. I don't recall exactly the words, but he

clearly had serious issues with it.

Q. What did --

A. "He" meaning the fire department.

Q. What issues were those?

A. Mr. Suson's authority to do what he did.

Q. When you say "to do what he did," you

are talking about the removal of the items from

Ground Zero?

A. Everything related to his conduct.

Q. Did you take notes of this conversation

with Mr. Gribbon?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you keep those notes?

A. For a period of time, yes.

Q. How long a period of time?

A. I don't recall.

Q. You threw away those notes at some

point, though?



A. Eventually, I believe that I -- I don't

like the words "threw away," but I don't have

them. I believe that I disposed of them.

Q. Do you have a practice of keeping notes

for a certain period of time before discarding

them?

A. I keep notes for a period of time.

There is no practice on how long.

Q. Why do you keep them?

A. It depends upon the story. It depends.

Q. Why did you keep the notes of your

conversation with Mr. Gribbon for a period of

time?

A. I keep all of my notes for a period of

time.

Q. What prompts your decision to discard

them?

A. There are many reasons why you discard

notes over time.

Q. What were the reasons in this case?

A. None specifically to this case.

It would be as simple as I can't keep

all of my notes forever.

Q. Did you discard your notes before or



after this lawsuit was brought?

A. Before.

Q. Are you aware that this lawsuit was

brought less than a year after the articles came

out?

A. I am aware, yes, if you tell me.

Q. What other quotes in Exhibit 100 are

attributable to your reporting?

A. The paragraphs that follow the one where

Mr. Gribbon is quoted.

Q. The paragraph that begins, "A

law-enforcement source..."?

A. Yes, right after where the FDNY

spokesman Frank Gribbon is quoted.

Q. Also the paragraph that begins, "An NYPD

spokesman told The Post..."?

A. Yes.

Q. And the paragraph that begins,

"Possession of the artifacts could be illegal..."?

A. Correct.

Q. And the paragraph that begins, "'You

can't tamper with a crime scene...'"?

A. Yes.

Q. What about the next paragraph, which



begins, "Suson said that he did not think that

loved ones of the 9/11 victims would want the

items he has"?

A. No.

Q. Are any of the other paragraphs

attributable to your reporting?

A. Give me a second to just look over this.

Q. By all means.


Q. How long has Frank Gribbon been a

spokesman for the FDNY?

A. I don't know.

Maybe ten years or more. I am not sure.

Q. Who is the "law-enforcement source"

referred to in the article?

I will refer to the paragraph. It's the

paragraph right after the Frank Gribbon quote.

It's the one that starts, "A law-enforcement

source noted that Ground Zero was declared a

'crime scene'..."

A. He is not identified there.

It would be Inspector Michael Coan, now

Chief Michael Coan.

Q. At the time, he was Inspector Michael



Coan?

A. Yes.

Q. When did you speak with then Inspector

Coan?

A. Presumably the day before this article

was published.

MR. CONTI: For the record, I think it's

C-o-a-n.

THE WITNESS: That is right, C-o-a-n.

He is not Jewish.

Q. You called him to ask him questions

about this?

A. Yes.

Q. What did you ask him?

A. I called him and I spoke to him in his

office.

Q. First of all, how many times did you

speak with him?

MR. CONTI: On that day?

MR. LEFKOWITZ: On that day.

A. In connection with this?

Q. Yes.

A. I am not sure; once, twice.

Q. What did you ask him?



A. I asked him what the view of the police

department is toward Ground Zero, materials there,

and what the police department's view would be of

people taking stuff from the Ground Zero area.

Q. Did you ask him about "stuff" or did you

ask him about personal artifacts?

A. I asked him about materials from Ground

Zero, be they people's -- clearly stuff that is --

whether it's construction debris or people's

things that could be tied to people who either

lived or died there or worked there.

Q. What was his response with respect to

things like construction debris?

A. I think that I published his response to

all of this. It's in a story.

Q. Is that the quote that begins,

"'personal artifacts are the property of the

people who own them'"?

A. Yes, that is part of his answer; yes.

Q. What is the other part?

A. They are there. They are published in

the story.

MR. CONTI: Read them into the record.

A. "A law-enforcement source noted that



Ground Zero was declared a 'crime scene' after the

attacks and said that 'personal artifacts are the

property of the people who own them.'"

Q. Is that everything that he told you?

A. That pretty much covers the territory.

In addition -- and the remark after it.

Q. The one that states, "'You can't tamper

with a crime scene and take stuff from [it]'...,";

is it that quote?

A. Yes.

MR. CONTI: Did you finish your answer

as to all of the quotes there that Mr. Coan

gave you?

THE WITNESS: No.

MR. CONTI: Let's finish your answer.

A. The sum and substance of Mr. Coan's

expression of the police department's official

view is expressed in all of those quotes,

including one that we have not mentioned, "An NYPD

spokesman told The Post, 'The NYPD has gone to

great lengths to return property to survivors and

relatives of those who were lost and continues to

do so.'"

Q. Did you talk to Inspector Coan about the

fact that Gary Suson did not remove personal

belongings from Ground Zero?

MR. CONTI: Objection to form.

Q. You can answer.

MR. CONTI: I think he answered the

question, but go ahead.

I objected.

A. What is the question again?

(Question read.)

A. Isn't that part of the question at hand

in Mr. Suson's issue?

Q. Well, I am not here to answer your

questions.

Why don't you just go ahead and answer

the question that I asked you.

MR. CONTI: If you can.

If you can't answer the question, you

can't answer the question.

A. I am not clear on the question.

Q. Did you ever talk to Gary Suson?

A. No.

Q. Did you ever investigate to find out --

A. Actually, I take that back. He might

have called me, actually, once.



Q. Do you remember what you spoke to him

about?

A. No.

Q. Did you --

A. It's vague.

Q. Did you ever investigate or do research

to find out what types of items Gary Suson had

removed from Ground Zero?

A. It's my understanding that the items are

listed here (indicating).

Q. You are referring to the items listed in

the article?

A. Yes.

Q. Other than those items, did you ever do

an investigation or research to find out what else

he might have removed from Ground Zero?

A. No.

Q. Did you ever -- now referring to the

items included in the article -- did you ever find

out the circumstances regarding the removal of the

"child's stuffed teddy bear"; did you ever find

out about that?

A. Only in what was represented to me by my

colleagues.



Q. What colleagues?

A. The city desk, Cynthia Fagen.

Q. Did anybody at the city desk speak with

Gary Suson?

A. I don't know who they spoke to.

Q. If you would answer my question, please.

MR. CONTI: He just said he did not know

who he spoke to.

Q. What did Cynthia Fagen tell you about

the child's stuffed teddy bear?

A. I don't recall.

Q. What about the battered cell phone?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Did anybody tell you anything about the

battered cell phone?

A. I don't recall anything about -- I don't

recall.

Q. What about the walkie-talkie?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Did anybody have any information to give

you regarding that walkie-talkie?

A. I don't know.

Q. Did anybody give you any information?

A. I don't recall.



About a walkie-talkie?

I don't recall.

Q. What about the rag doll?

A. I do not recall.

Q. What about the pair of twisted

eyeglasses?

A. I do not recall.

Q. Did you list these items to the NYPD

Inspector Coan when you spoke with him?

A. I don't believe I listed items, specific

items.

Q. Did you give him examples of types of

items?

A. I might have.

Q. What types of items did you give to him?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Was the recovery effort at Ground Zero

an operation that was run by the FDNY or the NYPD

or anyone else, to your knowledge?

MR. CONTI: I am sorry, I did not

understand that.

Could I have that read back, please?

(Question read.)

A. Yes.



Q. Who was it run by?

A. Well, various law-enforcement agencies

had different aspects of it, but for the most part

it was a New York City Police Department

initiative.

Q. The recovery efforts at Ground Zero you

are talking about?

A. I am sorry, then I did not understand

the question.

Am I allowed to ask you a question?

Q. Sure.

A. Are you referring to --

MR. CONTI: Let's slow down.

Q. Let me explain it. I will back up for

you.

A. I took your question a different way.

Q. There were recovery efforts at Ground

Zero?

A. Right, following 9/11.

Q. Following 9/11.

A. Right.

Q. Meaning there were people out there --

A. Right.

Q. -- digging through the rubble.



MR. CONTI: Let him finish the question.

A. Uh-huh.

Q. You have to answer verbally.

A. Yes.

Q. Who were those people that were digging

through the rubble?

A. A multitude of people were assisting in

the cleanup at Ground Zero and the hunt for

remains of people.

Q. Who was digging through the rubble?

A. The FDNY, NYPD, FBI, various other

agencies.

Q. Who was in charge?

A. That is a good question.

I am not 1000 percent sure, but I think

the NYPD, of the recovery. I could be wrong about

that.

Q. Did you ask that --

A. In fact, I am pretty certain it's the PD

that had the human recovery efforts. They

ultimately were in charge of it.

Q. The NYPD you said?

A. Yes.

Q. What about other kinds of recovery

efforts besides the human recovery efforts, was

that designated under the purview of another

authority?

A. I believe the NYPD was the lead agency

in just about all aspects of the recovery.

Q. Have you ever become aware that other

people removed items from Ground Zero?

A. Yes.

Q. When is the first time that you can

recall becoming aware that other people had

removed items from Ground Zero?

A. The first time?

Q. Yes.

A. I am not sure when the first time was.

Q. Would it have been before or after these


A. Before, I believe.

Q. So before these articles were published

you were aware of other people having removed

items from Ground Zero?

A. Correct.

Q. Who were these people?

A. Some officials of the FBI took them,

took some material, and they were all reprimanded



and got in trouble for doing it.

Q. Anyone else?

A. I believe the Manhattan district

attorney had some cases involving people that took

things.

I cannot remember the specifics.

Q. What about non-law-enforcement people?

A. I am not aware of any.

Q. What about after these articles were

published, did you become aware of

non-law-enforcement people having removed items

from Ground Zero?

A. I am not sure if they are non-law

enforcement, but I think that there were other

cases where serious concerns were raised about

people who took stuff from Ground Zero.

Q. Who were those people?

A. I think in one of these articles there

is mention of somebody else.

Q. You don't recall their name?

A. Bellone.

Q. Mike Bellone?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall anybody else?



A. Not off the top my head.

Q. Why don't we go to Exhibit 102.

Did you write this headline, "2nd Hit at

9/11 Fotog"?

A. No.

Q. Did you write what is in bold

underneath, "'Grave-rob' museum"?

A. No.

Q. Did you write any of the text of this

article?


Q. The byline refers to Murray Weiss.

That is you, right?

A. Yes.

Q. What input did you have in the creation

of this article?

A. Actually, very little except -- I had

none really.

MR. CONTI: Have you read through the

piece to refresh your recollection?

Take a minute or two to do that.

THE WITNESS: All right.

A. I apologize, yes, I apologize, I am

sorry, I made a mistake here.



I did contribute to this article, yes.

Q. What did you contribute?

A. There are two paragraphs that refer to

the New York City Fire Department sending fire

marshals to Mr. Suson's museum. That came from

me.

Q. What paragraphs are you referring to?

MR. CONTI: Why don't you read the

beginning of the two paragraphs.

A. Paragraphs 5 and 6.

"Yesterday, the FDNY dispatched two fire

marshals to Suson's 'Ground Zero Museum Workshop'

to investigate the exhibit."

New paragraph, "The marshals could not

gain entry to the building because the exhibit is

by appointment only, but they plan to return."

Q. Did you write those two paragraphs?

A. No, I did not write them.

Q. Did you provide the information to

Cynthia Fagen to write them?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. Is that the sum total of your

involvement in this article?

A. Yes, sir.



Q. Other than your investigation regarding

the marshals, did you do any further investigation

regarding Gary Suson or the Ground Zero workshop

in between the publishing of the first article and

this, the second article?

A. Not really.

Q. When you say "not really" --

A. No.

Q. The answer is no?

A. The answer is no.

Q. So you did not do any Internet search or

go to the library or ask the Post library --

A. I likely did, yes. I likely did.

I write lots and lots of articles. I

read material, generally, all of the people that I

write about.

I likely looked at the website, but I

don't recall whether I did or did not

specifically.

Q. When you say that you read material on

the people that you write about, that means in

advance of the articles, right?

A. Generally, yes.

Q. Did you do that in this case with Gary



Suson?

A. I said that I don't specifically recall.

Q. Do you recall making a request of the

New York Post library for clips or other

information regarding Gary Suson before these


MR. CONTI: Objection.

It was asked and answered.

You can answer it again.

A. I don't believe that I asked the library

to research Mr. Suson for me.

Q. Why not?

A. I rely on -- we are a team of reporters.

We rely on one another to do aspects of the

reporting.

My colleagues made representations to me

about information they had gathered and told me

what they were aware of.

Q. So you believe that Cynthia Fagen had

done that research, correct?

A. I would believe so, yes.

I would say --

MR. CONTI: There is no question

pending.



Q. How did you find out that the FDNY had

dispatched two fire marshals to the workshop?

A. I spoke with a confidential source of

mine in the New York City Fire Department.

Q. Did you call them or did they call you?

A. I believe I called them.

Q. What is the name of this confidential

source?

RA A. I am not going to say. It's a

confidential source.

Q. So you are asserting the reporter's

privilege here?

MR. CONTI: Yes.

For the record, the witness is not going

to give the name of this particular source

because we are relying on section 79-h of the

New York Civil Rights Law, plus the first 14

amendments to the U.S. Constitution and

Article I, Section 8 of the New York State

Constitution.

Q. You said that you called this person?

A. I believe I did.

Q. Why did you call them?

A. To learn what, if anything, the fire



department was doing regarding Mr. Suson and his

museum.

Q. What did this source tell you?

A. He told me what I reported here.

Q. Did you ask this source why they had not

done anything before the New York Post wrote a

story about it?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Did you ask this person why they had not

done anything for the three years that had gone by

since he removed the items?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Did you not think that those were

important questions to ask?

A. I am not saying that they are important

or not important.

Q. You did not ask them?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Did you ever do a follow-up phone call

to this source to find out whether the marshals

ever did gain entry?

A. I did, yes.

Q. When did you make this phone call?

It was by phone call, I presume?



A. Yes.

I can't recall if it was that day or the

next.

Q. "That day" being which day?

A. The day that I spoke to -- it had to be

the next day. It had to be next day because they

did not get in that day.

Q. Let's just --

A. The answer is that I did.

Q. Let's just make this clear.

We are talking about Exhibit 102 now --

A. Yes.

Q. -- which was published in the New York

Post on September 1, 2005, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. In this article you say, "Yesterday, the

FDNY dispatched two fire marshals..."

A. Correct.

Q. So that would mean that you spoke to

this confidential source on August 30th, correct?

A. 30 days --

MR. CONTI: Objection.

Let's go off the record for a second.




MR. CONTI: Back on the record.

A. I spoke to him on August 31st.

We reported the facts the following day,

September 1st.

That is why it says, "Yesterday, the

FDNY dispatched two fire marshals..."

Q. So you had this conversation with this

source on August 31st, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. In that conversation he told you that

the FDNY was dispatching two fire marshals?

A. Yes.

Q. You learned that day, on August 31st,

that those fire marshals were not able to gain

access?

A. Correct.

Q. Did you ever have a telephone

conversation with this source in which you

followed up and found out whether or not these

fire marshals were ever able to gain access?

A. Correct, I did.

Q. When was this second telephone

conversation?

A. I don't recall. I do not recall.



Q. What did the source tell you about that?

A. They said that they went into the

museum.

Q. Did they tell you whether Gary Suson had

been arrested?

A. They did not tell me that he had been

arrested.

Q. Did you ask?

A. I don't recall if I asked.

Q. Did you become aware whether Gary Suson

had been arrested?

A. I am not aware if he has ever been

arrested or not.

Q. Let's talk about this now.

You found out that the fire marshals

were able to gain access, right?

A. Correct.

Q. Did they tell you that they saw all of

the items that were in the museum?

A. Yes, they did.

Q. What did they tell you about that?

A. They said that they confirmed that the

items were there and then they left.

Q. Are fire marshals empowered to arrest if



they come across a crime?

A. I guess they can.

So can I.

MR. CONTI: Don't guess.

If you know, answer the question.

A. I believe fire marshals can make

arrests.

Q. They are law-enforcement officers,

correct?

A. Bound by law-enforcement rules.

Q. Correct?

A. Yes, they are.

Q. Did they tell you that there were any

items that were in the museum that should not be

in the museum?

MR. CONTI: When you say "they," it's a

single source we are talking about here, I

believe.

Q. Did the source tell you?

A. That was the matter at hand for the fire

department, whether he had materials that he

should or should not have.

Q. Did this source tell you that Gary Suson

should not have had those materials?

A. That was the indication, yes.

Q. Did they tell you, that is, did the

source tell you that something was going to be

done about this?

A. There was no indication what they were

going to do or not do. They were investigating.

Q. Did you follow up to learn what happened

in that investigation?

A. Not necessarily. Not really.

Q. Why not?

A. Its was being investigated. They take

time.

Q. Now we are almost two years later.

Have you investigated to find out

whether the fire marshals concluded their

investigation?

A. No, sir.

Q. Why not?

A. I am on to doing a million different

stories simultaneously.

Q. What is it that your source told you

which indicated to you that the fire marshals were

conducting a further investigation?

A. They sent two marshals to the -- it's in

the story. The spokesman for the fire department

said that he had issues with it. They sent fire

marshals to the place to look at it.

They did not get in. They went

subsequently to see what was there. That is what

is reported here.

Q. Is it reported here that they

subsequently got in and saw what was there?

A. No.

In this article, it only reports that

they went and planned on returning.

Is that what it says?

Yes, "...they plan to return."

Q. You became aware that they did, in fact,

return?

A. Correct.

Q. Why did you not publish that?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Well, there was an article the very next

day; was there not?

A. I guess.

MR. CONTI: Don't guess.

If you know, answer the question.

A. It appears that there were subsequent

articles, yes.

Q. In connection with those subsequent

articles, you had already learned that the

marshals had been there and seen the items?

A. I don't recall when they went and I

don't recall when they saw them.

Q. When did you have this follow-up

conversation with the source?

A. I don't recall.

Q. Please look at Exhibit 103.

MR. CONTI: We have been going for about

an hour.

Before we continue, I would like to take

a short break.

MR. LEFKOWITZ: Sure.

Off the record.


(Short recess taken.)

MR. LEFKOWITZ: Back on the record.

BY MR. LEFKOWITZ:

Q. Would you look at Exhibit 103, please.

A. Yes.

Q. Do you see the article entitled "9/11

'cur'ator Mike rips 'sick' scavenger"?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you write that headline?

A. No, sir.

Q. Did you write any of the language in the

text of the article?

A. I have to read it.

MR. CONTI: Take your time.

A. All right.

Q. Did you have any involvement in the

research or publication for this article?

A. No, sir.

Q. Go to Exhibit 104, please.

Referring to the article entitled "Mike

rips Sept. 11 'cur'ator," did you write that

headline?

A. No, sir.

Q. Again, I see that your name is not in

the byline for this article.

Did you write any of the text for it?

A. Give me a second and I will read it.

Q. By all means.

A. No, sir.

Q. Did you have any involvement in the

research or publication for this article?

A. No.

Q. Who makes the decision to place the

articles or the picture at the top, next to the

"NYPD Daily Blotter"?

A. All decisions of the placement of

stories are made by the news editors.

Q. Do you know who the news editor for this

might have been?

A. No.

Q. Would you please go to Exhibit 105.

Do you see the article at the bottom

entitled, "9/11-charity big busted"?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you write that headline?

A. No.

Q. Again, I see your name is not in the

byline.

Did you write any of the text of the

article?

A. Give me a second and I will read it.

Q. Of course.

A. No, sir.

Q. Did you have any involvement in

conducting any research for the publication ofthis article?

A. No.

MR. LEFKOWITZ: Why don't we go off the

record. I might be done.

MR. CONTI: All right.

MR. LEFKOWITZ: Off the record.


(Short recess taken.)

MR. LEFKOWITZ: Back on the record.

I have no further questions.

MR. CONTI: I have no questions of the

witness.

We are done for today.

MR. LEFKOWITZ: Off the record.


(Time noted: 10:45 a.m.)

MURRAY WEISS

Subscribed and sworn to before me

this day of , 2007.

Documents

NY Post Murray Weiss, Reporter Deposition: defamation / libel Lawsuit against New York Post