@gitana1 can explain it better than I, but what I believe she had said before is they have to have damages. She was fired from her job very quickly. Before the evidence came out recently. Perhaps she would have to prove that the reason she was fired was because of those statements? Statements that were false? And I believe that she was fired within a week if I recall correctly.
During that time, mainstream media did not publish her name, nor did we here at this site. So I don't think that anything that many said about her gave her damages to sue to result in her firing.
If she is going to after-the-fact damages after she was fired that she cannot get rehired, how could they differentiate the libel damages from her name being out there from the attorney's office and the Freedom of Information Act versus what was said on the internet?