James Ray Epps, an Arizona man, is actively pursuing a defamation lawsuit against Fox News for the false claims made about him by Tucker Carlson regarding the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Epps accuses Carlson of portraying him as an agent provocateur who helped orchestrate the insurrection on behalf of the federal government. The lawsuit has been ongoing since late 2024, with Epps attempting to have the case revived after a federal court dismissed his initial complaint.
The core of the legal battle revolves around whether Fox News acted with “actual malice” when making the defamatory statements. The standard of actual malice is particularly difficult to prove in defamation cases, especially when the plaintiff is a public figure. To meet this standard, Epps must demonstrate that Fox News either knowingly made false statements or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
In a recent filing, Epps’ legal team argues that they have provided ample evidence to meet the actual malice standard. They claim that Fox News should not be allowed to dismiss the case because the facts presented clearly show malice. The filing emphasizes that Epps has provided a substantial amount of detail that supports his defamation and false light claims, including new evidence that strengthens the argument of actual malice.
One key piece of evidence comes from Abby Grossberg, a former producer for Carlson’s show, who has publicly stated that she did not believe the story Fox News was telling about Epps. Grossberg, who was in a position to understand the inner workings of Carlson’s show, has alleged that Carlson and other Fox News executives coordinated to create false narratives about January 6, including the one involving Epps. Epps’ legal team argues that this is direct evidence of malice, as it shows that the network’s employees knew the claims about Epps were false but chose to broadcast them anyway.
Epps was indeed at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, but he was not charged with any significant crimes related to the riot. His actions, including his participation in pro-Trump activities and his interactions with other individuals, have been scrutinized, leading to the conspiracy theory that he was a federal agent sent to provoke the crowd. This theory gained traction due to the fact that Epps was not immediately arrested after the riot and was later removed from the FBI’s Most Wanted list after cooperating with investigators. The theory was further fueled by a text message Epps sent to his nephew in which he claimed to have “orchestrated” the events.
Epps claims that Carlson’s coverage of him, and the subsequent reporting by Fox News, went far beyond the truth and amounted to defamation. Fox News, according to Epps, not only misrepresented his actions but also portrayed him as a federal agent responsible for inciting the insurrection. The network, in its defense, argues that it was merely reporting on emerging news, but Epps maintains that the broadcasts were presented as facts, not opinions.
The legal filings also highlight statements from other former Fox News employees who have allegedly provided information implicating the network in the false reporting about January 6. Epps argues that these statements, along with the new evidence from Grossberg, demonstrate that Fox News acted with actual malice in its coverage of him.
Epps’ legal team contends that Fox News is trying to downplay the significance of this evidence and is attempting to avoid accountability for its actions. They argue that the network is misinterpreting the law and trying to dismiss the case before it can move forward. Epps maintains that the facts presented in his amended complaint are sufficient to raise a reasonable inference of actual malice and that further discovery will reveal even more evidence of the network’s misconduct.
In response, Fox News has strongly pushed back against Epps’ claims, arguing that the amended complaint does not address the deficiencies identified in the original case. Despite this, Epps remains determined to continue his legal battle, asserting that he has more than enough evidence to prove that Fox News defamed him and acted with malice.
