Former Gawker Editor-in-Chief A.J. Daulerio was made to sweat in court on Monday after being interrogated about his previous remarks made during the Hulk Hogan vs. Gawker trial last week where he claimed that he’d only refrain from posting a sex-tape if it featured a celebrity aged four or under.

“When you referenced your standard of news-worthiness being a child celebrity of over the age of four, you were joking? Is that what you just said?” Daulerio was asked as he sat in the witness box.

“I did say that,” replied the former Gawker editor.

“Do you think that’s a funny topic to joke about, child pornography?” asked Hogan’s standing lawyer, Shane Vogt.

“No, not at all,” answered Daulerio.

“And at the time that you made that joke, you were in deposition right?… You were in a deposition and asked about one of the central issues in this case, were you not?” shot back Vogt rhetorically.

“Central issues in this case, which is what?” asked Daulerio.

“Newsworthiness. That’s your defence right? That’s the First Amendment?” asked Vogt.

“It is,” replied Daulerio.

“And when you were asked a question about newsworthiness, you made a joke. Is that what you’re telling this jury here?” reiterated Vogt.

“No,” said Daulerio.

“You just said you were making a joke, Mr. Daulerio. Do we need to read back your testimony?” replied Vogt.

Daulerio agreed, and after reading back the testimony it was revealed that he had in fact said he had made a joke.

“So you were joking in your deposition about newsworthiness, correct?” asked Vogt.

“The newsworthiness of what?” replied Daulerio.

“Child pornography. You were joking about child pornography, were you not?” snapped Vogt, whilst Daulerio took a long pause.

“We’ve already seen the footage of this, and I was sarcastic” sighed Daulerio.

“You think the footage shows that you’re being sarcastic?” asked Vogt in surprise.

“I absolutely do,” replied Daulerio.

“You were under oath in your deposition, right? You raised your right hand and you swore to tell the truth?” Vogt snapped back.

“I did,” Daulerio confirmed.

“You knew it was being recorded, right?” asked Vogt.

“I knew it was being recorded,” Daulerio concurred.

“So you don’t think the transcript in this case accurately reflects what you were trying to convey in that deposition, is that correct?” asked Vogt.

“Absolutely not,” Daulerio replied.

Vogt then questioned Daulerio on the sheet that was given to him at the end of the deposition, which featured the full transcript of what was said. Vogt then reiterated the fact that Daulerio was given the choice to modify the transcript if it inaccurately portrayed what he wanted to say, before signing the sheet in agreement.

“You read your deposition carefully, didn’t you?” asked Vogt.

“I did,” claimed Daulerio.

“That’s your signature, isn’t it?” Vogt stated.

“It is,” Daulerio replied.

“You didn’t go back and change your testimony about a four-year old celebrity sex-tape being newsworthy, did you?” asked Vogt.

Daulerio then snapped back that if he had the opportunity to portray in writing that he was joking, he would have.

The deposition video was then played, replaying the words which Daulerio used under oath.

“Are you laughing there?” asked Vogt.

“Yep… it’s not out loud laughter but it’s a smirk,” claimed Daulerio.

“So you don’t think the First Amendment is that serious, do you?” Vogt replied.

“It’s very serious,” said Daulerio in a quieter voice.

A pause then ensued while Daulerio looked around nervously and played with his thumbs, as a degree of sweat was noticeable on his forehead.

A.J. Daulerio served as Gawker’s editor-in-chief between 2012 and 2013 and founded the digital tabloid news site Ratter.

Charlie Nash is a frequent contributor to Breitbart Tech and former editor of the Squid Magazine. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington.