Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has been ordered by a federal jury to pay a total of $148 million to two Atlanta election workers, Andrea “Shaye” Moss and her mother Ruby Freeman, after being found guilty of slander. Giuliani had claimed that Moss and Freeman worked to cheat former President Donald Trump out of the 2020 election. The jury deliberated for parts of two days before reaching their decision, awarding $75 million in punitive damages and $20 million each for emotional distress to both women. Moss was also awarded just under $17 million for defamation, while Freeman received nearly $16.2 million.

Following the verdict, Giuliani proclaimed that he did not regret anything and promised to appeal the ruling. He criticized the absurdity of the damages awarded, stating that it reflected the absurdity of the entire proceeding. Giuliani also claimed that he was not allowed to present any evidence in his defense. He expressed confidence that the case would be reversed once it reached a fair tribunal.

During the trial, Giuliani had declined to testify in his own defense, citing concerns about potential contempt charges. He accused US District Judge Beryl Howell of having a bias against him. Giuliani's attorney, Joseph Sibley, had argued that the initial $48 million demanded by the women would bankrupt his client. Sibley also asked the jurors to remember that Giuliani was a great man.

The trial revealed the impact of Giuliani's false claims on Moss and Freeman. They testified about feeling terrorized and experiencing regular threats and racist verbal attacks. They stated that their lives had been completely changed and that they had lost their identities. Moss mentioned that she was scared for her safety and the safety of her family.

In addition to the defamation trial, Giuliani is also facing legal troubles as one of the co-defendants in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' case against Trump over attempts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia. The 79-year-old's attorney did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling.

The jury's decision comes after a federal judge in Washington had already determined earlier this year that Giuliani was liable for defaming Freeman and Moss. The jury's role was to determine the amount of compensatory and punitive damages to award the women. The $148 million total damages awarded far exceeded the amount sought by the plaintiffs.

This case sheds light on the consequences of spreading baseless claims and the impact it can have on individuals' lives. Moss and Freeman hope that their ordeal will serve as a warning to prevent others from experiencing similar situations. They expressed that everyone's voice and vote matter.

Giuliani's false claims about Moss and Freeman were part of a larger effort by Trump and his allies to contest the election results. The women filed the lawsuit against Giuliani in 2021, stating that his claims had left them feeling terrorized and subjected to threats and racist attacks. The Georgia secretary of state's investigation later concluded that the allegations against Moss and Freeman were unsubstantiated and had no merit.

Giuliani's attorney argued during the trial that the harm suffered by Moss and Freeman was a result of other media outlets and personalities spreading the false claims, particularly the conservative website Gateway Pundit. The defense attorney placed the blame for the initial harm on the website, highlighting a lawsuit filed by Moss and Freeman against the outlet.

The trial also revealed Giuliani's continued support for his baseless claims despite acknowledging that he had made untrue statements about the women. He declined to take the stand in his defense and continued to make false claims about Moss and Freeman.

Giuliani's net worth and assets are believed to be less than $50 million, raising questions about his ability to pay the $148 million in damages. However, he remained defiant after the verdict, stating that he could still support his claims of voter fraud. He plans to appeal the judgment.

This case highlights the impact of spreading false information and the responsibility that comes with making unsubstantiated claims. It also emphasizes the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions and the consequences that can result from defamation.