Deborah Batts, the judge presiding over the defamation suit, ruled Tuesday that O'Reilly "has failed to present compelling countervailing factors that could overcome the presumption of public access" to the agreements.
The judge's ruling means that certain terms of the settlements are coming to light for the first time. On Wednesday, Neil Mullin and Nancy Erika Smith, the attorneys representing the three plaintiffs, introduced to the court settlement agreements between O'Reilly and women who had sued and settled with him. The agreement struck with Andrea Mackris, a former Fox News producer who filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against O'Reilly in 2004, required all parties in the case to disclaim any of the evidence "as counterfeit or forgeries" should it be made public.
As Smith and Mullin put it in a separate filing on Wednesday, the provision required Mackris to "lie -- even in legal proceedings or under oath -- if any evidence becomes public, by calling evidence 'counterfeit' or 'forgeries.'"
For those of you wanting an idea of how courts treat these types of hush money agreements that Trump favors, read this article. Note the Plantiff's in the O'Reilly case used the same vehicle (a defamation claim) that Stormy Daniels is using to get their NDAs declared invalid.