Assistant Chief of Police Katie Blackwell filed a defamation lawsuit against Alpha News, reporter Liz Collin, Dr. JC Chaix, and others in October 2024, which was recently dismissed.
Blackwell has now agreed to pay $75,000 to cover the attorneys’ fees incurred by the defendants, including Alpha News, who were represented by the law firm Madel PA.
In response to dismissal and the agreement, defense attorney Chris Madel said, “Katie Blackwell claimed all she wanted was justice. However, we got justice. She got an invoice.”
Madel explained that the attorneys’ fees were considerably higher. Under Minnesota’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, otherwise known as UPEPA, the defendants—including Alpha News—could have sought the entirety of their attorneys’ fees since Blackwell’s claims were dismissed.
However, out of respect for Blackwell’s service in law enforcement and the National Guard, the attorneys with Madel PA and the defendants were willing to accept the lesser amount that Blackwell agreed to pay.
In filing her defamation lawsuit, Blackwell claimed that she was “a respected member of the Minneapolis Police Department who was maliciously defamed with respect to her performance of the duties of her employment and profession … .”
Blackwell also claimed that the defendants—Alpha News, Collin, and Dr. Chaix—are “extremists who are more interested in shaping a narrative and provoking outrage than in communicating any version of truth” in producing Collin’s book “They’re Lying” and the documentary “The Fall of Minneapolis.”
The book and the documentary focus on the arrest and death of George Floyd and include excerpts of Blackwell’s testimony during the state trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer who was convicted of murder in Floyd’s death.
Reactions to Blackwell’s settlement
After hearing about the agreement, Dr. Chaix, a defendant and the writer and director of “The Fall of Minneapolis,” said, “Blackwell and her lawyers made more than a few outrageous claims, but labelling Liz and I as ‘extremists’ was completely unnecessary—and completely unprofessional. If her case had any merit, there’d be no need for name calling. But that’s just the state of leadership and lawfare these days, I suppose.”
As the proceedings unfolded, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara praised Blackwell and her courage and leadership on more than a few occasions. Chief O’Hara even offered literary and film criticism about Collin’s book and documentary and her attempts to “rewrite” history.
After hearing that Blackwell agreed to the settlement, Collin remarked, “There’s a reason why my book is titled ‘They’re Lying‘ and I hope the judge’s order to dismiss Blackwell’s lawsuit—and her agreement to this settlement—will add some credence to what I’ve been saying, and what I’ve been trying to help others realize all along.”
Blackwell’s signed declaration affirming the truth
In a move that finally brings truth to the matter, Blackwell also signed a written declaration, stating:
“I, Katie Blackwell, acknowledge, agree, and affirm that everything in the Honorable Edward T. Wahl’s Order Regarding Special Motion for Expedited Relief Under Minn. Stat. § 554.09 and for Fees and Costs Under Minn. Stat. § 554.16 dated April 8, 2025 is accurate, true, and correct.”
So, despite her initial claims, Blackwell has now affirmed that all of Judge Wahl’s findings are “accurate, true, and correct.”
As defense attorney Madel previously pointed out, many of the findings “question the truthfulness” and “veracity” of her testimony during the trial of Derek Chauvin, including the following:
- The documentary’s “core message—that [Blackwell’s] statements conflicted with MPD’s policy manual—is substantially true.” (Order at page 52; emphasis added.)
- “ … MPD policy and training materials were at odds with key aspects of their testimony.” (Order at page 33.)
- “Because the documentary evidence contradicts the unequivocal nature of her statements, the implication that [Blackwell’s] testimony was inconsistent with MPD’s policy and training is supportable and not defamatory.” (Order at page 33; emphasis added.)
- “Furthermore, MPD’s own Policy Manual (§ 5-311), in effect at the time, defined a neck restraint as including compression ‘with an arm or leg.’ This conflicts with Blackwell’s suggestion that MPD neck restraints were trained using only arms.” (Order at page 32.)
- The ruling states the impression left by Blackwell that “the depicted technique [a knee-on-neck restraint] was never trained by MPD” is “undermined by evidence in the record,” such as “MPD training materials from 2018-2019—the period of Blackwell’s tenure—[which] included images of officers applying knees to the neck or upper back” and “34 officers swore they were trained or saw knee-to-neck training.” (Order at page 32.)
- “The assertion that ‘it doesn’t seem like’ these witnesses were telling the truth generally aligns with the record’s substance. MPD’s neck restraint policy included use of the leg … Training slides showed applications using the leg … Officers testified that such techniques were permitted and were regularly taught and demonstrated … .” (Order at page 33.)
- “MPD policies authorized neck restraints using a leg … Training slides depicted the application of a knee to the upper back and neck area … Officers understood such techniques to be policy-consistent and part of their training … Under these facts, it is possible to interpret Blackwell’s testimony as incomplete or misleading by omission. Therefore, the challenged statement is substantially true … .” (Order at page 34.)
- “Accordingly, each of the three statements challenged by Blackwell are not actionable because (1) they accurately reflect the gist of the available record; (2) they are supported by MPD policies, training materials, and sworn officer declarations … .” (Order at page 35.)
- “Yet MPD’s own policy manual and other officers indicate that similar techniques were part of MPD’s training materials and policies. Even if Blackwell attempted to distinguish MRT … the overall record supports the film’s implication that her testimony was at odds with MPD’s institutional policy manual and the training some MPD officers claim they received.” (Order at page 50.)
- “In her testimony, Blackwell stated unequivocally that [it] was ‘not something we train.’ She did not acknowledge that MPD’s written policy permitted such a technique or that its training materials had historically included it. Whether or not this omission was intentional, the sting of Statement 5—that she and others misled the public—is not materially false.” (Order at page 50.)
- “Blackwell stated that [the] restraint was ‘not something we train.’ But training slides do depict similar techniques, and multiple officers swore they were trained in knee-on-neck control.” (Order at page 54.)
Blackwell’s affirmation about the truth in Judge Wahl’s findings may also help settle some of the strife and contention among current and former Minneapolis police officers, especially regarding the 14 officers who provided sworn declarations stating that Blackwell committed perjury during Chauvin’s state trial.
According to the settlement agreement, Blackwell also agreed to “not file, or otherwise pursue, any further Judicial Proceeding relating to the Book or Documentary.”
The agreement grants Blackwell 120 days to pay the $75,000 in attorneys’ fees.
