Day 23

Note:  I am a poor note-taker and these summaries will contain errors and omissions which will reflect my limitations.  My intention is to report on the facts as accurately as possible although a subconscious bias may creep in.  I can only provide glimpses into what I see as relevant and interesting events. My goal is to capture the essence of the day’s events rather than be comprehensive.

Read the reference documents: The Legal Case and Events Leading to Trial to obtain an understanding of the case and its history.  Names and terms are abbreviated and defined in  Glossary.

Examination of John von Heyking by Mr. Harrison, Caylan’s Counsel
Mr. von Heyking has a PhD in political science and is a professor at Arizona State University.  In 2020 he was a professor and chair of political science at University of Lethbridge.  He testified that:

·      He first met Caylan in 2019 at a Civitas conference in Toronto.

·      Civitas is right-of-centre association of journalists, lawyers, academics who meet annually to discuss political, economic, and social policy.

·      Caylan was interested in philosophy and political theory and they shared similar intellectual interests.

·      He had read of Caylan’s tribulations.

·      He had seen articles about those tribulations by the CBC, Global News, and Press Progress.

·      He invited Caylan to give a public lecture at the University of Lethbridge.

·      The lecture was scheduled for Friday, March 13 and Caylan was to talk on the documentary she had produced called Letter from Masanjia, and to discuss her experiences with cancel culture.

·      The University made a poster entitled Free Inquiry in the Age of Outrage advertising Caylan’s talk.

·      The posted was displayed on digital screens around the campus.

·      Between March 2 and 13 Professor von Heyking received emails from 33 different individuals in the university community – 30 of the emails expressed opposition to Caylan‘s talk.

·      Those opposing Caylan’s talk characterized Caylan as a white supremacist and a homophobe, and expressed the view that people such as Caylan did not deserve a platform at the University.

·      Some of those opposing the talk stated that they were in favor of free speech but not for this particular person.

·      Professor von Heyking had never experienced such a negative reaction.

·      He responded to each of the people opposing Caylan’s talk and invited each of them to meet with him to discuss the issue.

·      Only one of the 33 opponents took him up on his invitation to come and talk.

·      Some of the opponents sent copies of articles from CBC, Global New, or Press Progress as reasons for their opposition.

·      Some faculty members wanted to hold a “teach-in” as a counter-event to take attention away from Caylan’s talk.

·      The experience was stressful and unpleasant; the aggregate effect was significant.

·      Professor von Heyking did not believe that private messages provide a measure of character.

·      He wanted to let Caylan speak her piece and tell her story.

·      He also believed that the University should be a forum for robust debates, to provide an understanding of the political world.

·      The Provost of the University issues a statement affirming the University’s support for free speech.

·      The covid shutdown occurred on March 13 and because of covid Caylan’s talk did not proceed.

After a brief cross-examination by Mr. Mack, the testimony of Professor von Heyking was concluded, and he was excused.

Examination of Eric Kaufmann by Mr. Harrison, Caylan’s Counsel, regarding Expert Qualification

Dr. Kaufmann holds a BA from the University of Western Ontario and a MSc and PhD from London School of Economics and Political Science. He is a Professor of Politics at the University of Buckingham.

Mr. Harrison advised the Court that he wished to qualify Dr. Kaufmann as an expert witness qualified to provide the Court with opinion evidence in the fields of sociology, political science and history, with particular expertise in nationalism, ethnic identity, demography, cultural conflict, and elite discourse.

Dr. Kaufmann’s curriculum vitae was introduced; it was 65 pages long and provided details of his activities.  He is the author of 6 books, has contributed to 45 Refereed Articles, is the recipient of 26 Awards and Research Grants, is affiliated with think tanks, is a public commentator, has been interviewed on CBC and BBC, and often participates in podcasts.

Dr. Kaufmann testified for more than 2 hours concerning his CV, and his work with such subjects as ethnic nationalism, historical sociology, demography, cultural left liberalism, group ethnicity, liberal progressivism, intellectual multiculturalism, WASPs, race, bohemian left liberalism, demographics and religion, ethnic conflict, history, the rise of the social justice left – “wokeism“, postmodernism, and political science.

Dr. Kaufmann is also the vice-president of the Centre for Heterodox Social Sciences which he described as a research-based centre established to address a “crisis of viewpoint identity”

He described himself as an empirical quantitative social scientist.

He has expressed criticism of left illiberalism where “woke” cultural leftism is impinging on freedom of speech.

Cross-Examination of Dr. Kaufmann by Defence Counsel regarding Expert Qualification

Three of the Defendants’ Counsel cross-examined Dr. Kaufmann extensively and made the following points:

·      Dr. Kaufmann had been a professor at Birbeck College, University of London,

·      He was a critical of wokeism;

·      At Birbeck, Dr. Kaufmann had hostility with some of the faculty and students concerning wokeism

·      He appeared before a tribunal to defend his views

·      Dr. Kaufmann is a free speech advocate and his report advocates free speech

·      He described Canada is the first woke nation and said the legitimizing ideology was woke

·      Dr. Kaufmann is a fellow with several conservative think tanks

·      He sits on the advisory boards for the Free Speech Union (UK and Canada) and University of Austin

·      One of his books represents fighting back against wokeism and cancer culture

·      He does not approve of human rights tribunals

·      He has never before been qualified as an expert in court proceedings

·      He does not have a degree in history and no teaching post in history

·      He re-tweeted a post by Caylan in which she discussed this litigation

Re-Direct Examination of Dr. Kaufmann by Mr. Harrison

Dr. Kaufmann agreed that white nationalism, white supremacy, and racism exist.  He is opposed to all three.  But he thinks it important to identify them correctly and differentiate between extremism and mainstream opinions that are important in democratic debate.

Legal Argument

Counsel for the Defendants argued vigorously against recognizing Dr. Kaufmann as an expert witness.  The factual basis for the arguments appeared to be that Dr. Kaufmann was associated with right wing thought, was in favor of free speech and opposed to cancel culture. 

Comment

News outlets are supposedly advocates for free speech, but in this case the Defendants were tenacious in their efforts to prevent Dr. Kaufmann from testifying because he is a true advocate.  The Defendants objections to Dr. Kaufmann were largely based on the contention that only orthodox views should be allowed in court.

Ruling

Madam Justice Harris delivered a judgment on the qualification issue, ruling that Dr. Kaufmann was recognized by the Court as an expert witness qualified to give opinion evidence in the fields of sociology, political science and history, with particular expertise in nationalism, ethnic identity, demography, cultural conflict, and elite discourse.