Day 33
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.
The testimony of witnesses called by the CBC continued.
Direct Examination of Drew Anderson by Ms. Layton (Counsel for the CBC)
Mr. Anderson has a BA in Political Science and a journalism degree. He has worked in journalism for more than 20 years and, in March 2019, was a web journalist for the CBC. His evidence:
He testified about the CBC Journalistic Standards and Practices.
He first became involved in the story through a January 9 email from “Whistleblower.”
Whistleblower sent him screenshots of a Facebook message exchange in which Caylan discussed a trip to Calgary.
He told Whistleblower he was interested in UCP infighting and viewed this as an example of discord.
Whistleblower alleged that Caylan had been handpicked by Jason Kenney as a candidate.
On February 27, he wrote to Whistleblower saying he remained interested in pursuing the UCP infighting angle.
He testified that he did not then know Whistleblower’s identity.
He said he did not feel comfortable pursuing a story about Caylan because of a family connection.
On February 28, he received an affidavit sworn by Jivraj attesting to the veracity of attached screenshots.
He then knew that Whistleblower was Jivraj.
Jivraj imposed a condition that his identity not be disclosed.
Mr. Anderson had no role in the CBC decision to grant Jivraj anonymity.
He took no steps to investigate either Jivraj or the screenshots.
He decided not to pursue a story about Caylan because the connection was too close.
He passed the file containing the Caylan material to Bryan Labby.
He had no involvement in the March 19 CBC story about Caylan.
He called Jivraj but could not recall the conversation.
He provided Labby with Jivraj’s email address and phone number.
He remained interested in pursuing a UCP infighting story about the Mountainview nomination.
Mark Hlady then called him unexpectedly and discussed the Mountainview nomination contest.
His evidence confirmed his belief that Caylan had been handpicked by Jason Kenney.
He knew the relationship between Jivraj and Caylan was strained.
Mr. Anderson’s direct testimony concluded.
Cross‑Examination of Mr. Anderson by Mr. Harrison (Counsel for Caylan)
He agreed he would investigate the credibility of an anonymous source if he were doing a story.
He was interested in UCP infighting.
He knew Caylan grew up in Calgary but never challenged Jivraj’s statements about her residency.
He was focused only on the allegation that Caylan had been handpicked by Jason Kenney.
Mark Hlady had told him he was disqualified as a candidate to make room for Caylan.
He did not investigate whether that allegation was true.
He was not concerned about the truth of Whistleblower’s allegations about Caylan.
He did not contact Caylan to verify any of the allegations.
He said he did not investigate because he was not doing a story.
He did not recall being told that Jivraj had been suspended by the UCP for misconduct.
He had been provided with the October 2018 Press Progress article about the fraudulent resident letter.
He considered the Jivraj information fertile ground for a story about the Mountainview nomination contest.
He contacted members of the Mountainview Constituency Association board.
He did not recall who he spoke to or what was discussed.
The affidavit he received from Jivraj contained screenshots of the “pride parade” and “terrorist” messages.
He received the affidavit on February 28.
He did not contact Caylan to learn the context of the messages.
He did not recall how many times he spoke to Jivraj or what they discussed.
He provided Labby with Jivraj’s email address and phone number.
Mr. Anderson was excused.
Comment
Mr. Anderson appeared still to believe that Caylan had been handpicked by Jason Kenney. He said he had spoken to a member of the Mountainview Constituency Association board. By 2019, when Mr. Anderson was involved, all of the board members knew that Caylan was a legitimate candidate who had been elected by UCP members in a competitive contest against credible opponents. The board members also knew that Jivraj was a despicable liar and fraudster. It is unfortunate that such information was not conveyed to Mr. Anderson by the board member to whom he spoke.
Direct Examination of Bryan Labby by Ms. Layton (Counsel for the CBC)
Mr. Labby is an enterprise reporter who has worked at the CBC since 2007. His evidence:
He spoke about the CBC’s Journalistic Standards and Practices.
He first became aware of news tips about Caylan in March 2019.
Drew Anderson, who had a conflict, passed him an inch‑thick file concerning Caylan.
The file included an affidavit from Jivraj attesting to the authenticity of attached screenshots.
He knew the file concerned Caylan but did nothing with it initially.
Mr. Anderson told him that Caylan and Jivraj had been friends and had a falling‑out.
Mr. Anderson also told him that Helen Henderson had granted Jivraj confidential status.
He became aware of the Press Progress article and Caylan’s resignation on March 18.
He was instructed to reach out to Jivraj the next day to authenticate the screenshots.
CBC wanted to authenticate the screenshots so it would not have to attribute them to Press Progress.
He called and texted Jivraj and arranged to meet him at a café.
They met and their meeting lasted about 45 minutes.
He saw Jivraj scrolling through his phone looking for screenshots and saw Caylan’s photo.
Jivraj was jittery and nervous and said he expected to be served with a legal document.
Jivraj did not want his identity known.
Jivraj found one quotation and showed it to him; Mr. Labby took a photo of it.
Jivraj could not find the other screenshots but later emailed them.
Mr. Labby did not ask to see any messages before or after the screenshots.
Because he had personally seen screenshots, CBC could say it had verified them without attributing them to Press Progress.
After leaving Jivraj, he went to Caylan’s campaign office, which was vacant, and took photos.
He attended an NDP news conference held by Ms. Ganley and recorded her statements.
He attempted to contact Caylan by text and voicemail but received no reply.
He did not participate in the CBC story published later that day.
On March 20, Caylan emailed Ms. Withey with attachments:
the cease‑and‑desist letter sent to Jivraj,
the “Too Good” letter Jivraj had anonymously sent to 1,400 voters,
confirmation that Jivraj had purchased the domain caylanford.ca.
The email also included the police file number of a police investigation of Jivraj.
Ms. Withey acknowledged receipt and told Caylan, “Will work through it.”
She forwarded the material to Mr. Labby with the instruction “Go to town.”
Mr. Labby did nothing with the material.
He did not reach out to Caylan because other CBC colleagues were in touch with her.
He again reached out to Jivraj, who urged him to write about Jason Kenney not revoking Caylan’s UCP membership.
He wrote an article about Caylan on April 5.
The article attributed racist and homophobic opinions to Caylan.
He had never spoken to Caylan.
He did not reach out to her before writing the article.
He had earlier been reported to the CBC Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman found he had breached CBC standards and written an unfair and unbalanced story.
Cross‑Examination of Mr. Labby by Mr. Harrison (Counsel for Caylan)
Caylan’s resignation letter referred to Press Progress distortions and disregard for truth and decency.
CBC reported only her resignation, not the Press Progress conduct.
Her resignation letter also described Jivraj’s harassment and campaign against her.
CBC again reported only her resignation, not Jivraj’s conduct.
Mr. Labby was not asked to determine whether Press Progress had accurately reported Caylan’s comments.
He was not asked to find the full context of the messages.
His assignment was to meet Jivraj and verify screenshots.
He was not asked to investigate the relationship between Caylan and Jivraj.
He never asked Jivraj why he was disclosing private conversations.
Helen Henderson had granted Jivraj confidentiality.
He met with Jivraj, who scrolled through messages; Mr. Labby could not see the text as he scrolled.
He did not ask to see the full conversation.
He photographed the one screenshot Jivraj could locate.
He saw only that one screenshot; others were emailed later.
He was looking specifically for the “white supremacy” and “pride parade” comments.
On March 19, he attempted but failed to reach Caylan.
CBC had already published its first story.
On March 20, Ms. Withey forwarded documents to him.
The documents made clear that Jivraj:
had written pseudonymous emails to sabotage Caylan,
had purchased her domain name,
had harassed and stalked her,
had been reported to police.
Ms. Withey’s email said “Go to town.”
He interpreted this as permission to use the information as he wished.
Despite this, he did nothing to investigate Jivraj.
Instead, he sought more information from Jivraj to incriminate Caylan.
On April 5, CBC published his article attributing racist and homophobic opinions to Caylan.
Mr. Labby was excused.
Comment
Although CBC claims to conduct fair and balanced reporting, Mr. Labby’s assignment was narrowly focused on finding incriminating material about Caylan. He was not asked to examine context, motivation, or credibility. When provided with clear evidence of Jivraj’s misconduct, he did nothing with it and instead published a story attributing racist and homophobic views to Caylan.
Direct Examination of Elizabeth Withey by Mr. Woodley (Counsel for the CBC)
Ms. Withey has been with the CBC since 2017 and is an Associate Producer with the Eye Opener. Her evidence:
She knew nothing about Caylan until after Caylan had resigned.
She was assigned to reach out to Caylan on the afternoon of March 19.
She emailed Caylan inviting her to appear on the Eye Opener the next day.
She wanted to know:
why Caylan resigned,
the context of the Press Progress messages,
who the “conservative Muslim” was,
Caylan’s perspective on the issues raised.
Caylan initially agreed to an interview.
Caylan asked for the line of questioning.
CBC does not provide interview questions in advance.
Ms. Withey knew Rachel Ward had also contacted Caylan.
She and Caylan had a short, unrecorded phone call.
Caylan told her about Jivraj; it sounded to Ms. Withey like Caylan had been the victim of a smear job.
She emailed Caylan confirming the interview.
Later that evening, Caylan emailed saying she had changed her mind and would not participate in the interview because she did not believe she would get a fair hearing.
The next day, Ms. Withey texted asking if Caylan wished to reconsider.
She also asked whether Caylan had documents to share.
Caylan provided the requested documents, saying they could inform CBC reporting.
The documents showed that Jivraj:
had written pseudonymous emails to sabotage her,
had purchased her domain name,
had harassed and stalked her,
had been reported to police.
Ms. Withey forwarded the documents to Mr. Labby with the note “Go to town.”
In April, Caylan sent her the essay Apologia.
Ms. Withey read it and wanted to get Caylan on the Eye Opener.
It was unclear whether Caylan wished to be interviewed.
Cross‑Examination of Ms. Withey by Mr. Harrison (Counsel for Caylan)
Ms. Ward was told by Caylan that she could not answer CBC’s questions because she did not have records of the Facebook messages.
Caylan emailed CBC saying she would not do the interview because she did not believe she would receive a fair hearing.
She had initially agreed to an interview.
She then interacted with Ms. Withey and Ms. Ward.
She learned CBC was broadcasting ongoing stories about her.
She learned CBC had met with Jivraj and sought more leaked messages.
She then wrote saying she did not believe she would be treated fairly.
Ms. Withey requested documents.
Caylan sent documents showing that Jivraj had:
written pseudonymous emails to sabotage her,
purchased her domain name,
harassed and stalked her,
been reported to police.
Ms. Withey replied, “Got this. Will work through it.”
She forwarded the documents to Mr. Labby with “Go to town.”
She was confident Mr. Labby would use the documents appropriately.
In April, Caylan sent Apologia and suggested it was a good time for a post‑mortem.
Ms. Withey suggested to Jennifer Keen that CBC interview Caylan.
Ms. Keen did not assign the interview.
Ms. Withey was excused.
Comment
Ms. Withey may be the CBC employee who thought that Caylan had been wronged and genuinely wanted to hear her story.