Day 5

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 quotes which Press Progress included in the damaging and destroying article about Caylan (the Article”) are quoted within the Lebrun email to Caylan, Tab TB1000144, [click HERE to view].

Caylan testified about the Article:

·      it had been approved for publication by Broadbent Institute, the owner of Press Progress ;

·      the Article or versions or excerpts of it immediately became national news; it was headlined in both national and local newspapers; broadcast on both local and national TV stations, and  became the subject of thousands of tweets,  posts, and podcasts;

·      for an example of another Press Progress publications, Tab 5, {click HERE to view];

·      the publications continued for years, and the Article is still live on the Press Progress website;

·      a graphic designer had been used to make the quotes in the Article look real; highlights had been added;

·      the statements she made had been altered and edited; words had been removed; half of one statement had been deleted; portions were highlighted.

Caylan dealt with each of the quotes, identifying what had been omitted and what altered.  She explained at length the context of the discussions from which the quotes had been taken and how they would be understood in the context of the discussion.

She explained that when she used the words “demographic replacement” she was using the term as it was then understood by social scientists; she didn’t then even know about the odious “Great Replacement” theory.

Caylan testified concerning journalists that, after March 18 :

·      one column favorable to her was published in the National Post;

·      she knew and talked to other columnists who wanted to take up her cause, but were prevented from publishing; [Caylan identified by name the journalists who were favorably inclined];

·      except for those so identified and conversations with Ms. Ward on March 19, no Canadian journalist, publisher or broadcaster consulted Caylan;

The testimony continued:

·      Press Progress, CBC, and Toronto Star all referred to their source as “a credible long time Conservative Muslim;”

·      Caylan explained why Jivraj was not “credible” nor a “long time Conservative” nor a Muslim;

·      He was not a Conservative because he had had been driven out of Ontario for his political conduct, never volunteered or worked for the Party, and was effectively removed by the Party as president of the constituency association;

·      Muslim: Caylan read in Jivraj’s own words in emails in which he expressly declared that, “the substances of the Islamic doctrine never meant anything to him,” and that he “never really viewed Ishmael as my community”;

·      Jivraj provided both the Toronto Star and CBC  with his sworn, 16-page affidavit containing images of screenshots of excerpts from the Messages; Jivraj swore they were authentic;

·      both the CBC and Toronto Star considered that affidavit as their “reliable source”;

·      both had reason to suspect Jivraj’s honest and credibility;

·      Caylan provided both with information to prove that Jivraj had a history of false attributions; that he was conniving and deceitful;

·      they chose to rely on Jivraj;

·      both of them gave Jivraj anonymity presumably because of his bad reputation; they tried to cloak him with credibility;

·      neither of them interviewed Caylan or gave her an adequate chance to state her case.

Among the allegations published by Toronto Star, CBC, and Press Progress were words to the effect that:

·      she endorsed white supremacy and white nationalism and was analogous to the shooter in the Charlottesville massacre;

·      she was morally unfit to be a candidate;

·      she was “handpicked” by Kenney as a candidate while living in Ontario,  Tab4, {click HERE to view] ;

·      she was or potentially was a believer in the odious “Great Replacement” theory;

·      she was critical of Islam.

Caylan testified that:

·      in the Messages she had expressly renounced both white nationalism and white supremacy;

·      she met Kenney only after moving to Alberta and had been “picked” as a candidate by >500 voters in a contested nomination contest;

·      she didn’t even know about the Great Replacement theory in 2017; she now rejects the theory;

·      she has never criticized Islam but has criticized the beliefs and conduct of some members of that faith.

Concerning her personal situation on March 19 Caylan testified that:

·      she was 32 and her daughter was 3.5;

·      She had been campaigning for a year and had seen little of her husband and daughter;

·      She and husband Jared had made huge sacrifices to allow her to run; they thought the sacrifice worthwhile;

·      Jared had largely given up his career to stay at home, tend their daughter, and do the household duties;

·      Neither she nor Jared had any significant income; they were living on a small inheritance Jared had received;

·      their financial position was precarious; Caylan was worried that her employment with Foreign Affiars would no longer be available;

·      When she eventually went home on the night of the 18th her husband Jared was angry about what had happened;

·      Caylan became the subject of Jared’s anger;

·      She was shell-shocked and in denial; she couldn’t sleep;

·      She received kind, supportive messages from campaign workers and voters; and cried upon reading a particular message from a director;

·      She tried to be philosophical about the disaster, and read Plato.

Testimony continued:

·      A CBC journalist’s tweet drew the Article to the attention of Caylan’s employer, Foreign Affairs;

·      The National Council of Canadian Muslims said they were happy that she had resigned; that white supremacy had no place in Alberta politics;

·      Her friends were feeling peer pressure to denounce her;

·      She was repeatedly denounced as a white supremacist and the Party denounced as a white supremacist party;

·      She was called many names, some of which were “a hateful woman”, “fucking excrement”, an “asshole”, “bad white trash”, “white scum”, “human piled garbage”, a nazi, a white supremacist and a white nationalist;

·      She was accused of racism and intolerance;

·      It was said of her that she would have been happy 200 years ago when white men killed 2 million indigenous;

·      Only a week ago someone sent her an email saying she was running a Hitler training school;

·      The CBC contacted her by email and threatened her with more leaks they were going to publish; they then posed a series of loaded questions;

·      The Party had “cut her loose” and no longer provided support; she understood the political reason was that she had become toxic.

Regarding the CBC, Caylan said that:

·      She had expected better based on her understanding of journalistic ethics;

·      They had been sitting for months on defamatory materials provided by Jivraj;

·      They never inquired of her as to the truth of the allegations against her;

·      They published to the effect that Caylan had homophobic beliefs and had denigrated pride parades;

·      They asked emotionally-loaded, bizarre questions of Caylan;  

Court Adjourned.

Comment

·      Caylan was completely cancelled by false articles and couldn’t do anything about it; her situation was hopeless;

·      the tape of the conversation between Caylan and Ms Ward demonstrated that the CBC was advised of the nefarious conduct of Jivraj and Press Progress; but only seven hours after receiving that advice CBC published and broadcast the defamatory material which originated with Jivraj and was first published by Press Progress;

·      the standards of the CBC, the Broadbent Institute, and Toronto Star were appalling; has anything changed?

·      CBC and Toronto Star maintain that they gave Jivraj anonymity because he was a “confidential source”;

·      they did not disclose his identity because of his sordid reputation;

·      what can be concluded about the ethics and editors of CBC and Toronto Star?