The jury in the Rolling Stone defamation trial says the magazine, its publisher, and an author are all liable for statements made in connection to a retracted article.

The federal courtroom heard the jurors' decision around 1:30 p.m. Friday, November 4. The jury deliberated for about 19 hours, going over hundreds of pieces of evidence and weeks' worth of testimony, both from the witness stand as well as video taped depositions.

Former University of Virginia Associate Dean of Students Nicole Eramo filed her lawsuit back in May 2015. Her suit claimed Rolling Stone, its publisher Wenner Media, and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely defamed her. Eramo argued Erdely's article "A Rape on Campus" unfairly portrayed her as a villain, indifferent to UVA student "Jackie's" allegation that she was gang raped at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house in September 2012.

Rolling Stone published Erdely's article in its November 2014 issue. An investigation by the Charlottesville Police Department in 2015 found no evidence to back up the claims made in the article. The magazine eventually retracted the article and apologized.

Jurors have found Erdely liable with malice on six claims:

• Statement 1 - "Lots of people have discouraged her from sharing her story, Jackie tells me with a pained look, including the trusted UVA dean to whom Jackie reported her gang-rape allegations more than a year ago."
• Statement 3 - "As Jackie wrapped up her story, she was disappointed by Eramo's nonreaction. She'd expected shock, disgust, horror."
• Three claims made in relation to Erdely's comments on the Brian Lehrer Show
• A statement Erdely made in connection to a Washington Post article

The magazine and its publisher were found liable with malice on three claims.

• Statement 1 - "Lots of people have discouraged her from sharing her story, Jackie tells me with a pained look, including the trusted UVA dean to whom Jackie reported her gang-rape allegations more than a year ago."
• Statement 2 - "Jackie got a different explanation when she'd eventually asked Dean Eramo the same question. She says Eramo answered wryly, "Because nobody wants to send their daughter to the rape school.""
• Statement 3 - "As Jackie wrapped up her story, she was disappointed by Eramo's nonreaction. She'd expected shock, disgust, horror."

The jury concluded Rolling Stone and Wenner Media defamed Eramo when the article was republished in December 2014 with an editor’s note.

Libby Locke, an attorney for Nicole Eramo, says her client feels vindicated.

"It feels very good to have a jury of Nicole's peers come back and vindicate what we have known from day one and so we are very pleased," she said. The jury was deliberative, very careful, and we really appreciate all the work and time they put into it."

Rolling Stone issued a statement following the jury’s decision:

For almost 50 years, Rolling Stone has aimed to produce journalism with the highest reporting and ethical standards, and with a strong humanistic point of view.

When we published ‘A Rape on Campus’ in 2014, we were attempting to tackle the very serious and complex topic of sexual assault on college campuses, a subject that is more relevant today than ever.

In our desire to present this complicated issue from the perspective of a survivor, we overlooked reporting paths and made journalistic mistakes that we are committed to never making again. We deeply regret these missteps and sincerely apologize to anyone hurt by them, including Ms. Eramo.

It is our deep hope that our failings do not deflect from the pervasive issues discussed in the piece, and that reporting on sexual assault cases ultimately results in campus policies that better protect our students.

We will continue to publish stories that shine a light on the defining social, political and cultural issues of our times, and we will continue to seek the truth in every story we publish.

Lawyers for Rolling Stone had no comment on the way out of court. However, one of the lead attorneys for the magazine did shake Eramo's hand after the verdict was read.

Jurors will be back in court Monday morning to begin the penalty phase, which is when they will determine how much Eramo can receive in damages. Eramo is seeking around $7.5 million in damages.