Opening arguments in the defamation trial between Carin Bondar and Barry Neufeld were heard in Chilliwack Law Courts Tuesday (Nov. 14).
The civil lawsuit alleges former school trustee Neufeld defamed Bondar, a school trustee, when he called her a 乌鸦传媒渟triptease artist乌鸦传媒� during an internet talk show in September 2022 broadcast by Action4Canada called the Empower Hour.
乌鸦传媒淭his statement was false, injurious and not defensible as fair comment,乌鸦传媒� said Bondar乌鸦传媒檚 lawyer, Susanna Quail, in her opening statements.
It was day one of a six-day trial in B.C. Supreme Court in Chilliwack presided over by Justice Michael Stephens.
乌鸦传媒淒r. Bondar is not a striptease artist,乌鸦传媒� Quail said. 乌鸦传媒淪he is an accomplished science communicator and educator and a school trustee.
乌鸦传媒淭he defendant asserts that Dr. Bondar had explicit and highly sexualized public performances widely famed by her on a YouTube channel over a number of years.
乌鸦传媒淎nd we say the evidence will show that that乌鸦传媒檚 not true,乌鸦传媒� the lawyer said.
The science education video in which Bondar appears to be swinging on a wrecking ball while scantily clad was not 乌鸦传媒渟exually charged entertainment,乌鸦传媒� Quail argued.
The video about evolution and natural selection was created by Bondar in 2014. It was a parody of the pop hit Wrecking Ball by Miley Cyrus, and Bondar乌鸦传媒檚 video was called 乌鸦传媒淥rganisms do Evolve.乌鸦传媒�
In the video, Bondar is wearing what the pop superstar wore 乌鸦传媒� a white tank top, underwear and boots. The video was filmed almost shot for shot in similar fashion, and for a brief moment on-screen, the plaintiff appeared nude in several frames.
Bondar乌鸦传媒檚 PhD dissertation focused on animal reproduction and led to her ongoing interest in popular science education.
乌鸦传媒淲hile her work often draws on human sexual behaviour, it乌鸦传媒檚 not actually about human sexuality,乌鸦传媒� Quail told the court.
乌鸦传媒淚t乌鸦传媒檚 about animal biology.乌鸦传媒� And it often uses pop culture to 乌鸦传媒渆ngage viewers,乌鸦传媒� she said.
The online content that Bondar has produced 乌鸦传媒渋s mildly titillating in a silly way,乌鸦传媒� Quail said.
Bondar乌鸦传媒檚 work has been featured on the Discovery Channel, the Science Channel, National Geographic, Scientific American and Animal One.
Quail said the court would determine if the striptease comment could be considered 乌鸦传媒渇air comment乌鸦传媒� and that would likely form the 乌鸦传媒渞eal test of where this case lies.乌鸦传媒�
Bondar is alleging that 乌鸦传媒淢r. Neufeld defamed her by this comment and seeks damages,乌鸦传媒� the lawyer said, adding that evidence would show general and aggravated damages were appropriate.
Quail said Neufeld 乌鸦传媒渉as not only refused to retract or apologize for the remark, but repeated it and included it in his fundraising materials,乌鸦传媒� which she said was 乌鸦传媒渙utrageous and malicious乌鸦传媒� in that it increased the plaintiff乌鸦传媒檚 mental distress.
In terms of the legal framework, three elements have to be established in a claim of defamation under the law, Quail said.
One of them focuses on injury to someone乌鸦传媒檚 reputation, in that they 乌鸦传媒渢end to lower the plaintiff乌鸦传媒檚 reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person.乌鸦传媒�
Bondar乌鸦传媒檚 lawyer said that all three would be 乌鸦传媒渨ell-established.乌鸦传媒�
Neufeld has pleaded 乌鸦传媒渏ustification,乌鸦传媒� among three defences, but Quail said the evidence will show 乌鸦传媒渉e knew full well乌鸦传媒� that Bondar is not a striptease artist.
乌鸦传媒淭his is simply not who Dr. Bondar is or what she has achieved,乌鸦传媒� the lawyer said.
The three defences Neufeld filed in connection with the suit were: justification, fair comment and qualified privilege.
乌鸦传媒淣one of these defences can succeed,乌鸦传媒� Quail said.
She told the court Bondar would testify about 乌鸦传媒渉ow hurtful and frustrating乌鸦传媒� it was to have her reputation as an accomplished science educator 乌鸦传媒渞eplaced with an entirely fictional narrative that she is an underdog striptease artist, scrabbling her way to public office,乌鸦传媒� Quail said.
In conclusion, Quail said the libel case is 乌鸦传媒渘ot about balancing the public interest乌鸦传媒� and it isn乌鸦传媒檛 about 乌鸦传媒渁 political contest乌鸦传媒� over SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) 123.
乌鸦传媒淭his case is only about defamation,乌鸦传媒� she said.
乌鸦传媒淭his case isn乌鸦传媒檛 about Mr. Neufeld乌鸦传媒檚 personal political agenda. This trial is not a social movement showdown, it乌鸦传媒檚 not about culture wars.
乌鸦传媒淭his is actually a very straightforward application of the law of defamation which exists to protect reputations from exactly the kind of harm Mr. Neufeld has inflicted and continues to do so.乌鸦传媒�
Neufeld乌鸦传媒檚 lawyer, Paul Jaffe, began his cross examination Tuesday, and it continued Wednesday. The trial is expected to run until at least Tuesday.
RELATED:
RELATED:
