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
Is there recourse for appeal? This is not how things ought to be in Stephen Harper’s Canada at least.
“Thanks for the welcome!”
My pleasure.
Good luck to you, the harshness of the sentance will help you on appeal even as bad as it looks now. Also, somebody might want to talk to Harper’s Government and see what they can do legislatively.
This Warman guy seems to be a busy little bee re: the formation of the Canadian Thought Police.
More background on the accuser (if the source can be trusted) here: http://silentconsort.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/warman-epithets-unbecoming/
And I think, more info on the background of the whole situation here: (near bottom of the page)(this seems to be the "other sides" argument...I guess calling someone a communist in dafamation in Canada...especially if you live in one of the western provinces) http://anti-racistcanada.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html
/back to lurker mode
-PJ
They never opened the comments on that article. That kind of says it all, doesn't it?
Is this forum going to be targeted in a similar way? I hope not!
They were reactions to the plaintiff's political activities using the now-repealed thought crimes legislation in Canada. They were comments comparable to what would be found in a political forum anywhere on the net. But if I post any of the actual words, even for the purpose of discussing the case, I will go to prison.
We will not have free speech much longer if (up)Chuck Schumer, Bill DeBlahsio, and Barack have anything to say about it.
So who is suing the left-wing sites?
Free Speech + Truth = Hate Crime
We’re so close now ..
ya can hear the advocates uhhh litigants thereof teeth gnashing
Appeal is available but very very difficult and very very expensive.
Me too.
Were the statements really libelous?
It's one thing to go after the posters of the comments, it's another to make the site liable for the comments or prevention of future comments. Of course in this case, two of the commenters were the site's operators.
Me too.
Were the statements really libelous?
It's one thing to go after the posters of the comments, it's another to make the site liable for the comments or prevention of future comments. Of course in this case, two of the commenters were the site's operators.
Could you post a page or a link with the legal documents, sentencing, news on upcoming trials, etc. on the site for us to scan through without endangering your freedom?
Is Warman a radical homosexual activist?
conniew can’t answer that. There’s a link in Post 99.
Were the defamatory statements true?
See tagline for example.
What exactly were the “defamatory” statements? And is TRUTH not a defense in Canada?
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.