Everyone at FR should reflect the deeper meaning of these actions against free speech. Will assembly be next? We are born, where we are born.....freedom of speech is not an abstract idea. The fight will be long and hard.
God save us all.
Posted on 01/29/2014 7:14:41 AM PST by conniew
By Andrew Duffy, OTTAWA CITIZEN January 28, 2014
OTTAWA — The online political forum, Free Dominion, has shut down after a wholesale defeat in a libel case brought by Ottawa human rights lawyer Richard Warman.
A jury concluded that Warman was maliciously defamed by four commentators on Free Dominion, a website that bills itself as “the voice of principled conservatism.”
Warman has been awarded more than $127,000 in general damages, aggravated damages, punitive damages and court costs because of 41 defamatory statements published on the conservative website in 2007.
Warman rose to prominence during the past decade by using the Canadian Human Rights Act to shut down the websites of people spreading hate speech; it made him the target of free speech advocates in the conservative blogosphere, and on websites such as Free Dominion.
In a recently released decision, Ontario Superior Court Justice Robert Smith granted Warman a permanent injunction that prohibits Free Dominion from ever repeating “in any manner whatsoever” any of the 41 defamations.
The website’s operators, Connie and Mark Fournier, of Kingston, this week shut down freedominion.ca, saying they could not control what comments other people posted.
“By leaving the forum open and allowing people to comment, we’d be opening ourselves to a contempt-of-court charge,” Connie Fournier said Tuesday.
“If someone repeated one of those comments, we would be in trouble — and could even go to jail.”
The Fourniers have operated the website as a “labour of love” for the past 13 years.
“It’s really sad to be at the point where we have to shut down the political forum,” she said. “But we’ve come to the point where it would be crazy for us to keep it open: it would be too much of a risk.”
They have vowed to appeal the defamation case and have launched a campaign on Indiegogo.com to raise money for their legal costs. The campaign has so far raised $2,800 of its $25,000 goal.
The Warman case is among the first to address at trial what constitutes defamation in the caustic political blogosphere. It adds to case law that suggests the Internet does not shield anonymous posters from legal action if they wrongfully attack someone’s reputation.
On his website, Warman said the case offers lessons for anyone involved in an Internet blog or forum. Chief among them, he said, is the idea that “If you make a mistake, admit it, repair the harm, and move on.”
Connie Fournier, however, said that if the case stands on appeal it will impair the once vibrant Canadian blogosphere.
“I think this is a terrible thing for free speech on the Internet,” she said. “When people who are allowing comments on their blogs and forums look at humongous costs and damage rulings like this, at injunctions that could put them in jail, they’re not going to want to take the risk of opening their site.”
The jury found that the four defendants — Roger Smith, Jason Bertucci, Connie and Mark Fournier — had been “malicious, high-handed and oppressive” in their conduct. Justice Smith also found the defendants had acted unreasonably by refusing to accept Warman’s offer to settle the case for $5,000 each.
Warman had to fight in court to obtain the identifies of those anonymous posters who had left defamatory comments on Free Dominion. The case dragged on for six years, culminating in a three-week trial before a six-person jury.
The Fourniers have never apologized or issued a retraction about the statements found to be defamatory.
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
By the way, I just got word tonight that the Federal Court of Appeal has resurrected the zombie Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act that was repealed by Parliament last year.
The lower court had upheld its constitutionality but declared the penalty provisions associated with it to be unconstitutional. This new decision overturns that one and they’ve declared everything about it, including the penalty provisions, to be constitutional!
This means that, for the handful of people who are still subjects of complaints under the zombie law, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is now free to put the boots to them financially as well as gag them for life.
I’ve never been more ashamed of my country.
How can they resurrect a law that’s been repealed by the parliament?
When it was repealed it had a "coming into force" clause that made it effective one year from the date it was made into law. That isn't until June this year.
But, my understanding is that when laws are repealed it is not retroactive, anyway. All of the cases that are being tried under that law proceed as if the law still exists.
The whole thing is bizarre to me. When Parliament kills a law, it should be dead, it shouldn't just turn into some kind of zombie-freak law that sucks out our legal brains until it's through with all its victims. This clearly was not the intent of Parliament.
Okay, I see (and I agree with you on the zombie thing). Does this mean that after June of this year cases like the one brought against you can no longer be brought?
Nobody will be able to use the "hate speech" provisions of the Human Rights Act to bring cases against people after June.
Our case, though it is related because the comments in question were about the plaintiff's use of Section 13, is a defamation case that was brought in a real court.
We've (mostly) gotten rid of Section 13, but now we need to get rid of our gross defamation law, too.
Well that seems to be some good news anyway. The hate speech laws were what was used against Mark Steyn, weren’t they?
Boy it would be some sweet payback if you could start a grassroots wave and get the defamation law repealed. Your case should make it obvious to anyone who’s even remotely sensible why it needs to be repealed.
Yes, that was what was used against Mark Steyn. And, it was the public outcry that resulted in it being repealed.
If the same thing happened with defamation law, it would be awesome!
Okay, so maybe Canada hasn’t totally gone around the bend then.
I wonder what it would take to get some movement started towards repealing or modifying the defamation law? I would think that conservative lawmakers would be quite sympathetic towards what you’ve experienced, maybe to the point of taking action. Have you tried contacting your representative in Parliament? Might be worth a shot. I wonder if Mark Steyn or Ezra Levant might be willing to help? I really feel like your experience crystallizes what is screwed up about that law and gives it a “story”. This might be an opportunity in disguise.
I suppose if one wants to transit from CONUS to Alaska by road, you have to get a passport?
Everyone at FR should reflect the deeper meaning of these actions against free speech. Will assembly be next? We are born, where we are born.....freedom of speech is not an abstract idea. The fight will be long and hard.
God save us all.
It won’t be long until Obama and Jerry Brown and Andrew Cuomo attempts to shut down FreeRepublic.
Anyway, we're all friends now.
The Human Right act is a classic example of good intentions going wrong, and ending up infringing on rights as much as on protecting them. Apart from the whole thing being unneccesary anyway, as the common law system did the same thing much better, what it has effectively done is nothing more than change the position of the goalposts. It gives some people more rights but only at the expense of taking away the rights of others. And as the rights removed are your ability to say what the heck you want, that's very dangerous, particularly in a nation with a democratic system of government. We are the ones who are supposed to tell the government what is right, not the other way round. People say "oh but its wrong to say hurtful and/or hateful things about others". Fair enough. But surely the better answer to that is to have a citizenry who are so morally tuned in they can spot prejudice, bigotry, humbug and falsehood and just simply discount it? When you legislate against such things, you basically give the Government the right and power to enforce truth, and it has no business doing that.
I cannot understand how anyone can be made culpable for someone else's comments - even on a blog. Especially if said comments are subsequently removed.
I hope they go off shore.
Let’s give her a BTTT- 273 replies is impressive....
Just BTW? The good folks at FD were kind enough to host “Miss Emily has died” when I lost my young bride of 25 years.
Later, I started “Letters to Miss Emily” which was first about her but became my daily slog thru life. I write there each day.
Disgrace, conniew. Has Mark Steyn contacted you, or vice versa? (Haven’t read the whole thread yet.) Somehow he prevailed against the HR popinjays.
OK; there is your post about Steyn right at 22. Sorry about that.
Canada does not have the First Amendment nor protections for free speech. It’s why pastors there will eventually be jailed for proclaiming the gospel.
Very sorry to hear of this, conniew. ‘Get’s soetoro thinking.
w, s ping....
I’ve been on the hunt/contract for the past year overseas, but Im back now. Stay strong and never compromise of your values.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx-F-_Z9pCg
Our server is offshore, but WE would have to move out of the country to protect ourselves. Unless we stepped away and someone in another country took over the site.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.