This case is the culmination of years of litigation during which Richard Jewell and, since his death, the executor of Jewell’s estate collectively, “Jewell”, have sought retribution for the injury to Jewell’s reputation following his identification in the media as a suspect in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing during the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. Jewell sued Cox Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a The Atlanta Journal Constitution “AJC”1 and various AJC reporters2 collectively, “Media Defendants” for statements made in several articles in which the Media Defendants reported, inter alia , that investigators believed Jewell planted the bomb in Centennial Olympic Park and then placed a 911 call to law enforcement. In Atlanta Journal-Constitution v. Jewell “Jewell I “,3 this Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling that Jewell was a limited-purpose public figure in the context of this case, and further set forth a balancing test to aid the trial court in deciding whether to force the Media Defendants to reveal the identities of the confidential sources from whom they gleaned the information reported in the subject articles.4 Upon remand, the trial court concluded that Jewell could not satisfy the requirements set forth in Jewell I and, consequently, denied Jewell’s motion to compel. In subsequent orders, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Media Defendants on all of Jewell’s claims. It is from these orders that Jewell now appeals. For the reasons noted infra , we affirm the trial court’s orders. I. Background
The underlying facts of this case are not in dispute. The Centennial Olympic Park bombing occurred in the early morning hours of July 27, 1996. Jewell, who had been working in the park as a private security guard, identified an unattended knapsack under a park bench and immediately alerted an officer from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation “GBI” to its existence. The discovery of the knapsack was the direct result of Jewell’s remarkable astuteness, as illustrated by frequent and detailed surveys of his patrolling area, as well as his keen awareness —despite an ongoing concert and a significant crowd —of the relationship between the multitude of people around him and their various belongings.
