BBC Challenges Trump and Seeks Jack Smith Testimony in Defamation Case

The BBC is pressing ahead with efforts to obtain testimony from President Donald Trump and former special counsel Jack Smith as it defends a $10 billion defamation lawsuit over a documentary about the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. In separate court filings in October 2026, the broadcaster challenged Trump's missed deposition and opposed his attempt to block Smith from giving evidence.

According to the BBC's filing in the Southern District of Florida, Trump was scheduled to answer questions under oath on October 16, 2026, but his lawyers cited other matters of national importance. The broadcaster subsequently learned that Trump attended a campaign rally in Dalton, Georgia, before traveling to his Mar-a-Lago residence for a Republican National Committee fundraising event.

The BBC argued that the circumstances surrounding Trump's absence justified court intervention and renewed its request to compel him to provide testimony. A hearing concerning the deposition dispute was scheduled for Thursday, according to the reports published October 19, 2026.

In its filing, the BBC described the history of arranging Trump's testimony as follows: "Plaintiff President Donald J Trump’s deposition was, after much foot-dragging, initially scheduled for October 16, 2026," the BBC's lawyers wrote.

The broadcaster said Trump's legal team subsequently cited scheduling conflicts. Its filing stated, "On September 28, 2026, however, plaintiffs’ counsel informed the BBC that ‘the president is no longer available for his deposition on October 16 due to other matters of national importance’".

The BBC also told the court that it wanted Trump to answer questions because the dispute concerned evidence central to his claims. The broadcaster asked the judge to "compel" Trump to attend a deposition under the rules governing discovery in federal litigation.

The separate dispute over Smith's testimony concerns evidence gathered during his investigation of efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The BBC argued that his findings could help establish what Trump knew about the possibility of violence surrounding the Capitol attack.

Trump's lawyers opposed the subpoena, arguing that Smith had no firsthand knowledge of the preparation or delivery of Trump's January 6 speech. They also maintained that his evidence would rely on information collected from other people and that he had already testified publicly about his investigation.

In their court filing, Trump's lawyers wrote, "He was not present when President Trump’s January 6, 2021, speech (the ‘Speech’) was made, nor did he participate in its preparation. Smith does not have any personal knowledge regarding President Trump’s state of mind at the time the Speech was given. Any evidence that Smith gathered during his investigation consists of secondhand knowledge based on materials that he and other third parties collected from various sources," according to The New Republic.

The BBC rejected the argument against obtaining Smith's testimony. Its attorneys wrote, "None of [Trump]’s arguments for blocking the deposition of Mr. Smith can withstand scrutiny," according to The New Republic's account of the filing.

The broadcaster also argued that Trump must establish the falsity of the implication he challenged in the documentary. Its lawyers wrote, "No one forced Plaintiff to file this lawsuit and to dispute that his speech on January 6 incited the violence that followed at the Capitol. But as long as he chooses to maintain the case, he cannot commit the fundamental injustice of preventing the BBC from obtaining the evidence it needs to robustly defend itself on every element of his claim, including Plaintiff’s burden to prove falsity," the publication reported.

Smith has not objected to the subpoena, according to Yahoo News. The BBC said his public report does not contain all the evidence collected during his investigation, which concluded that investigators had strong evidence that the January 6 violence was foreseeable to Trump and that he and his allies sought to use it to advance efforts to overturn the election result.

The lawsuit stems from the BBC's documentary "Trump: A Second Chance?," broadcast shortly before the November 5, 2024, presidential election. The program combined excerpts from different portions of Trump's January 6 speech, including his remarks about walking to the Capitol and fighting "like hell."

The BBC apologized for the editing, acknowledging that it created a misleading impression that Trump had made a direct call for violent action. However, the broadcaster denied defamation and has sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing in part that the documentary was not distributed in the United States and that Trump could not demonstrate reputational harm caused by the edit.