Day 8

Unfortunately, my trial notes for Day 8 were lost or inadvertently deleted.

On this day, Mr. Harrison concluded his direct examination of Caylan. Mr. Mack, appearing for the Broadbent Institute, then commenced his cross‑examination.

The evidence addressed, and many of the questions posed, are expected to re‑emerge later in the proceedings through other witnesses and counsel, often in different forms.

Day 7

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.

Direct Examination of Caylan by Her Counsel, Richard Harrison

General Allegations

• David Kahn, then leader of the Alberta Liberal Party, referred to Caylan as a white supremacist
• Caylan reiterated that she had described white supremacy as “odious and perverse”
• She was accused of being a white nationalist, an Islamophobe, a racist, and a white supremacist

Testimony About the Toronto Star

Coverage and Headlines

• A Toronto Star headline read: “Star Candidate Removed for Racist Views Will Not Be Removed From Party”
• The Star frequently quoted third parties critical of Caylan
• The Star made no effort to quote anyone supportive of her; its coverage lacked balance
• It equated her with other disqualified candidates and suggested her candidacy reflected a failure of the vetting process
• The Star often featured large photos of Caylan, including a front‑page image with the headline: “We Need Higher Standards”

Use of the Press Progress Article

• The Star frequently quoted or paraphrased the Press Progress Article
• It claimed Caylan portrayed herself as a victim
• It suggested she had made statements that were hateful, racist, homophobic, and transphobic

Caylan’s Testimony About the Coverage

• She testified that the Star’s publications were extremely misleading and false
• She stated she never expressed animus toward others and never portrayed herself as a victim
• She believed she was enduring a “trial by media” in which she was not allowed to defend herself
• She felt the Star was attempting to humiliate her
• The Star never sought comment from her
• She described the portrait being painted of her as a “doppelgänger inverse image” of who she actually was

Impact on Caylan

• She developed agoraphobia due to widespread circulation of her photos alongside defamatory articles
• She did not want to be seen in public

Interactions With Star Reporters

• A Star reporter contacted her twice
• On one occasion she asked him to email his questions; he never did
• On the other, she said she could not speak that day but would be available two days later; she never heard from him again

Testimony About Defendant Nanda

Statements and Conduct

• He made statements based on the Press Progress Article and attributed views to her that were not her views
• He claimed Caylan’s membership in the UCP was evidence the Party held racist, white nationalist views
• He stated, “white supremacy has no place in Alberta”
• He was working for third‑party advertisers supporting the NDP
• He wrote articles for Press Progress, including one criticizing Danielle Smith for interviewing Caylan
• He was associated with, and acted as lawyer for, Progress Alberta (a settled defendant)
• He associated Caylan with mass murderers
• He never spoke to her, despite her invitation to meet for coffee to discuss her views

Conduct During the Danielle Smith Interview

• When Caylan appeared on Danielle Smith’s show, Nanda began posting negative comments shortly after the interview began and continued throughout
• He stated he was in disbelief that Caylan was allowed to explain her “white supremacist views”
• He stated that she had made no apology as if an apology was owed
• He paraphrased allegations from the Press Progress Article and condemned Danielle Smith for conducting the interview

Testimony About the Danielle Smith Radio Interview

Reaching Out to Danielle Smith

• In March 2019, Caylan contacted Danielle Smith, stating that the media coverage of her was unfair
• Although advised by the Party to “lay low,” she wanted to explain that she did not hold the abhorrent views attributed to her
• She sought a platform to explain what had happened
• She reached out to Danielle because she viewed Danielle as an open‑minded intellectual who would conduct a fair interview

The Interview

• Danielle conducted a 30‑minute live interview on radio and online
• Caylan explained how she had been sabotaged by Jivraj and Press Progress and that the views attributed to her were not her own
• Listener responses were initially positive, and she received supportive messages, which brought her relief

Negative Reaction

• Negative tweets soon followed, showing angry bias
• Nanda and Toronto Star reporter Emma McIntosh joined in the criticism
• McIntosh mischaracterized Caylan’s statements, writing that she was racist, unapologetic, and had made extreme white supremacist statements
• Caylan hoped the interview would redeem her, but those hopes were “suffocated”

Pressure Campaign Against Corus

• A movement began to pressure Corus Entertainment to fire Danielle Smith for airing the interview
• An online petition, written by Nanda and published by Press Progress, included a form letter making it easy to complain to CHQR
• The petition described Caylan as a “disgraced candidate,” accused Danielle and Corus of “shocking dereliction of duty,” repeated quotes from the Press Progress Article, and included the phrase “say no to white supremacy on CHQR”
• 737 people sent the form letter to Corus
• The Broadbent Institute and Nanda launched a defamation lawsuit against Corus
• Corus capitulated and removed the interview
• Danielle Smith was forced to issue a public apology
• A senior Corus executive asked Caylan to remove the interview from her website

Impact on Caylan

• She believed the interview would help clear her name, but every attempt to do so was undermined
• She felt as though she had been buried, clawed her way to the surface, and then been buried again
• The most distressing part was that she could do nothing; no one would hear her story

Additional Testimony About the Toronto Star

Social Media Activity

• Toronto Star reporter Emma McIntosh began tweeting criticism before Caylan had even spoken during the Danielle Smith interview
• McIntosh questioned why airtime was being given to an “unapologetic white supremacist,” called it disturbing and problematic, and asked how CHQR could claim to be responsible media
• She tweeted, “Hilariously, Caylan is claiming she has friends”
• Nearly 54,000 people viewed McIntosh’s tweets

Subsequent Star Coverage

• The Star reported that Caylan resigned after making racist comments, without disclosing that Jivraj was the source
• It wrote that she dodged questions about racist, Islamophobic, and anti‑LGBTQ views
• Despite Caylan having participated in three hours of public interviews explaining her views, the Star never made any positive or balancing comments
• Anyone who supported Caylan was immediately attacked online
• Neither the Star, the Broadbent Institute, nor Press Progress published anything reflecting Caylan’s perspective as set out in her resignation letter or interviews

Testimony About Caylan’s Apologia

• In 2022, Caylan wrote a 9,000‑word essay titled Apologia, (see Glossary) in which she attempted to explain that the Facebook Messages were academic and philosophical conversations
• She sent copies of Apologia to CBC reporter Ms. Ward and to Nanda, but neither gave any indication they had read it
• For every 1,000 readers of a CBC article, only one person read Apologia

Testimony About the Effect on Caylan

Immediate Aftermath

• The events of March 18 were life‑changing for Caylan; people online said she should die or be “shot into space”
• Friends abandoned her out of fear of backlash
• She was the family’s primary breadwinner and suddenly had no employment

Attempts to Respond Publicly

• She continued writing and tried to find an editor or journalist willing to publish her material; none would take it on or were permitted to publish it
• She felt her survival depended on “writing her way out of the hole,” but this proved impossible
• She became self‑conscious about writing because no one would publish her work

Social and Personal Isolation

• She felt as though she was in “eternal exile”
• Her social life collapsed immediately; she was removed from Christmas party lists
• People told her they did not want to appear to be supporting a “white supremacist”
• Her husband Jared attempted to organize a surprise birthday party for her, but no one would attend
• Friends said they were afraid to socialize with her because it would appear to be supporting her
• She described herself as sitting “in the ruin” of her life—treated like a pariah and very alone
• She felt like a ghost, existing somewhere between living and dying, and felt she no longer belonged in Alberta or Canada

Online Abuse and Media Repetition

• Brutal posts and tweets about her were ubiquitous on social media
• Canada’s largest publications repeatedly portrayed her as a horrible person
• She received hostile emails telling her she was trash, worthless, or should die
• She did have a small number of private supporters

Support From Individuals

• Sadiq (see Glossary) called her every day for months after March 18
• Jared tried to encourage and support her
• When she and Sadiq visited the Ranchmen’s Club, a friend told them a waiter was tweeting that he never thought he would have anything to do with Caylan

Loss of Hope for Redemption

• She hoped for several months that she could redeem herself, but by autumn 2019 it became clear she could not
• She experienced acute anxiety episodes similar to PTSD
• When applying for jobs, she struggled with how to explain what had happened in 2019

Psychological Impacts

• At times while driving she had to pull over because she felt she was losing her mind
• She experienced episodes where she could not speak and felt mentally disintegrated
• She was gripped by terror, hopelessness, and despair
• She lost her self‑esteem, her earning capacity, and her friendships
• She gave up hope that justice would be done and began “looking toward the other shores,” wanting to die
• For relief she hiked in the mountains; in winter 2019 she climbed a high mountain, lay in the snow, and asked to die

Cognitive Impairment

• She felt she was losing her mind and could not control her thoughts
• Her ability to concentrate was severely diminished; she would read and realize she retained nothing
• At times Jared would speak and she “wasn’t there”
• She recognized her own cognitive dissonance
• She suffered acute and severe depression

Employment Consequences

• Her maternity leave ended shortly after her resignation
• She sought re‑employment with Global Affairs but was not hired
• She made many job applications but received no replies
• Anyone Googling her name saw only derogatory statements; her name was “toxic”
• As the primary breadwinner, the financial stress was severe
• In 2019 her income was $38,000, with legal fees and school expenses
• In 2020 her income was $50,000—insufficient to support a family of four
• Because of her reputational damage, employment in fields for which she was qualified was impossible

Attempts to Pursue Further Education

• She considered returning to postgraduate studies and applied to the University of Calgary; she received no reply
• She applied for a professorial position at the University of Calgary; she never heard back
• Search results for her name made her unemployable

Testimony About the Non‑Existent NDP

Legal Identity Issues

• Caylan wanted to sue the NDP for its role in the events of March 18 but learned that the Alberta NDP does not exist as a legal entity
• She was seeking a remedy against a party that legally did not exist; no entity was responsible for its conduct
• Identifying a responsible party required multiple court proceedings, including an appeal to the Alberta Court of Appeal
• the legal proceedings concerning NDP extended for years and entailed significant legal fees

The “Straw Man”

• Ultimately, the non‑existent party appointed a “straw man” to accept responsibility for the 2018 conduct
• The straw man was supposedly indemnified by an entity that Caylan knew did not exist
• She settled with the straw man

About the UCP in Power

• After the UCP was elected, many UCP volunteers and campaign staff obtained government employment
• Defeated UCP candidates were appointed to senior positions in the new administration
• Caylan was never contacted by the UCP

Comment:

Credibility was essential to Caylan’s life; her credibility was destroyed by false allegations.  It was impossible to correct the false allegations.  Deep depression and despair understandably overwhelmed Caylan.

Day 6

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.

Direct Examination of Caylan by Her Counsel, Richard Harrison

Initial CBC Coverage

• On March 18, the first CBC article was published; it quoted from the Press Progress Article and adopted its framing
• Thereafter, CBC repeatedly referred to Caylan as a white supremacist
• CBC repeatedly described Jivraj as “a longtime Muslim Conservative with deep ties to the Party”

CBC’s Reporting on the 2017 Messages

• In the 2017 Facebook Message conversations with Jivraj, Caylan had posed rhetorical questions about the value of pride parades to invite debate
• CBC reported that she resigned over “white supremacist comments” and that she had questioned pride parades
• Caylan explained her view that participation in pride parades should be voluntary, that people should not be condemned for choosing not to walk, and that she personally preferred gay concerts over gay parades

CBC’s Claims About the Messages

• CBC proclaimed that it had “seen and verified FB messages,” when in fact it had only seen screenshots of selected images taken out of the Messages
• CBC reported that Caylan had refused to comment
• Caylan had declined to give a live oral interview to Ms. Ward on March 19 and reiterated her reasons
• CBC claimed it had offered her a chance to respond but published its article seven hours later without giving her that opportunity
• On March 18, Caylan gave Ms. Ward full particulars of Jivraj’s deceit and treachery, both in a telephone conversation and through her resignation letter

About the CBC

Selective Use of Information

• CBC quoted only portions of Caylan’s resignation letter, omitting key reasons behind her decision to resign
• CBC did not share with its readers, listeners, or viewers any part of the taped conversation between Caylan and Ms. Ward

Amplification of Third‑Party Defamation

• CBC further publicized defamatory comments about Caylan by third parties, including:
• Ms. Ganley, an NDP candidate, who described Caylan as a racist
• Mayor Nenshi, who condemned Caylan for not apologizing and said she was not fit

CBC Internal Records

• Internal CBC records showed that one column about Caylan had been viewed 358,334 times
• Another internal record revealed that nearly 100,000 people had viewed one CBC post

More Testimony About Caylan

Search Results and Public Perception

• Before March 17, Google search results for Caylan’s name were complimentary and flattering
• After March 19, with only two exceptions, search results were condemnatory
• She was repeatedly accused of being a white supremacist or white nationalist; she explained why neither term could be attributed to her

Association With the Charlottesville Shooter

• In one Facebook Message, Caylan had written that the Charlottesville massacre was “sickening”
• Despite this, she was continually associated with the shooter
• Publications repeatedly linked her to the massacre

Testimony About the Toronto Star

Use of Press Progress Material

• The Star published many articles quoting or paraphrasing Press Progress
• It stated that Caylan promoted white supremacist and racist talking points and expressed sympathy for white nationalist views

Failure to Seek Her Perspective

• The Star emphasized that Caylan never apologized
• Caylan testified she did not apologize because she did not know what she was supposed to apologize for; everything published about her was false, and the views attributed to her were not her views
• The Star had been in touch with Jivraj since January, when they received screenshots from him
• They described Jivraj as a “Muslim conservative with ties to the UCP”
• They never asked Jivraj to produce the full Messages

Limited Contact With Caylan

• Caylan received one email inquiry about her resignation from a Star reporter
• She referred him to her resignation letter and told him to email any further questions
• She never received anything else from that reporter or any other Star journalist

Amplification of Third‑Party Criticism

• The Star frequently quoted third parties who criticized Caylan
• They quoted Mayor Nenshi and “gave him a lot of ink”
• They quoted Hlady (see Glossary), who claimed he had been unfairly ousted as the Mountainview candidate so Caylan could run
• Hlady said “they couldn’t beat me,” despite polling showing he had 3% support before being disqualified
• Hlady had been disqualified by the Party for sexually inappropriate conduct while an MLA

Distribution

• The Toronto Star publishes Star Metro, a free street‑handout that reproduced Star articles and was widely distributed
• Editions of the Star’s publications were available in Calgary and Edmonton

Testimony About Defendant Nanda

• Nanda made approximately 70 defamatory statements about Caylan, both in op‑eds and in tweets
• Caylan and Nanda had never met, and she knew nothing about him
• She invited Nanda to meet her for coffee so she could explain the truth; he did not accept the offer, nor did he contact her or ask for an explanation

Testimony About the Taped Podcast Played in Court

• The podcast featured four individuals who cruelly, mockingly, and derisively disparaged Caylan, as well as Jason Kenney and Licia Corbella
• One of the participants was Defendant Stephen Magusiak, a reporter with Press Progress
• One speaker, repeating or paraphrasing Press Progress quotes, said Caylan had a “very well‑formed white nationalist philosophy”
• Caylan was accused of being a misogynist and repeatedly called a white nationalist
• The speakers described Licia Corbella as a “shill” for the UCP
• They contemptuously questioned Caylan’s Oxford degree and mocked her documentary Letter from Masanjia
• They stated that her UCP nomination was rigged and called her a grifter
• One participant compared Caylan to a member of the Ku Klux Klan
• Magusiak knew of Jivraj’s history of treachery and his attempts to harm Caylan
• Magusiak mocked Caylan’s husband and children

Testimony About Harm Done

• The Chair of the Canadian Constitution Foundation initially spoke to Caylan about joining their board, but after March 19 he told her that other board members considered it a “non‑starter”
• He said she would never be rehabilitated and would be a reputational liability
• Caylan testified that she had always believed her cognitive and intellectual gifts were meant to be used in service of others — “If we have gifts, we owe them to other people”
• She found she could not use her gifts to help anyone because her name and reputation would harm any cause she supported
• She could not support her family or help her friends; she felt she was of no use to anyone
• The most difficult part for her was feeling that her life no longer had purpose

Testimony About Speaking Engagements

• In fall 2019, she was invited to speak at a Calgary event attended by 50–100 people
• She spoke, but masked protesters attended, calling her a white supremacist
• Dr. John von Heyking of the University of Lethbridge invited her to speak about freedom of speech and political science
• Student groups attempted to cancel the event and compared it to events that led to the Holocaust
• The university did not cancel the event but stated it would allow protests
• The COVID‑19 lockdown intervened, the event was cancelled, and she was never invited back

Testimony About Employment

• Caylan applied to Global Affairs to renew her employment, but her application did not result in a position
• She was unemployed and applied for long‑term disability benefits
• In 2021, her income was $80,000, consisting mostly of disability benefits
• She was uncomfortable receiving benefits — being paid money she did not earn
• She wanted employment, but her reputational damage made her unemployable
• In late 2021, she reapplied to Global Affairs through her union
• Global Affairs rehired her, but in a role not commensurate with her previous work — essentially clerical, answering emails for a consular emergency fund
• The position involved no policy or analytical work
• It was a teleworking role; security rules required her to be isolated and work only from her bedroom
• She was humiliated that no one had any interest in using her abilities
• She became depressed; her return to work was deemed unsuccessful
• Her supervisors could not give her a positive review
• She returned to disability benefits for the last three months of 2022
• Unemployment was difficult, but the psycho‑social and cognitive effects were worse

About Caylan’s Struggle

• She applied for employment but received no responses
• Interviews of her that had been available online were taken down
• She felt as though she was drowning in grief, no longer present or attached to the world
• She welcomed the idea of death
• Her capacity for joy disappeared
• She suffered severe fatigue and was constantly tired
• She often had no incentive to get out of bed and sometimes stayed in bed all day
• When out in public, she would sometimes feel grief well up as if it were a physical substance her body could no longer contain
• She would begin crying spontaneously

Therapy and Diagnosis

• She began cognitive therapy with Dr. Lucido
• On her intake form, Dr. Lucido wrote that she needed help dealing with unremitting grief and passive suicidal ideation
• Her symptoms were consistent with severe depressive disorder and PTSD‑like symptoms

Impact on Her Children

• Her daughter Anora was less than one year old; Caylan missed much of Anora’s first year
• Anora has no memory of her mother before the trauma
• Caylan tried to put on a normal façade for her daughters, but it was always forced
• She felt she was never truly present with them
• Her older daughter, Everen, once asked Caylan to tell her a story; Caylan replied she was too sad to tell stories
• Everen told her, “You need to go campaigning again,” because she could see how sad her mother was
• Everen said that next time she would protect her mother
• Caylan felt it was wrong that her three‑year‑old believed she needed to protect her
• Everen was perceptive and could tell that Caylan had changed

Loss of Purpose

• In the background, Caylan was trying to figure out how to earn a living, find employment, and rebuild
• She could not support her family or help her friends; she felt she was of no use to anyone
• The most difficult part was the feeling that her life no longer had purpose

Marriage Breakdown

• Caylan testified that her former husband Jared would testify and she did not want to impinge on his evidence
• Jared’s social world had been Caylan’s social world; when her world collapsed, his collapsed as well
• It was traumatic for him; he felt powerless watching Caylan be attacked and become suicidal
• The stress on the family was immense
• Jared tried to give Caylan space to work and heal
• His ability to work full‑time was impaired because Caylan was deeply depressed and he had to care for the girls
• He fell into a deep depression
• They separated in the summer of 2021 but continued living in the same house because they could not afford to live separately
• They eventually divorced
• Caylan described it as a profound failure; she was so embarrassed that it took years before she told anyone

Testimony About Jivraj’s Treachery

Online Attacks

• Jivraj continued feeding ideas to Press Progress about how to socially isolate Caylan
• He targeted anyone who said anything positive about her
• He created two pseudonymous Twitter accounts to attack her: the “Serena R” account and the “Mr. Wilson” account

The “Serena R” Account

• “Serena R” was portrayed as a liberal‑leaning woman with children
• The account amplified negative remarks about Caylan and directed people to hostile stories
• These included claims that she promoted white genocide and made “racist, antisemitic comments”

The “Mr. Wilson” Account

• “Mr. Wilson” attacked Caylan from the right
• He called her a coward, weak, “no Margaret Thatcher,” and someone who “folds like a cheap suit”

Targeting Journalists Who Interviewed Her

• Joel Crichton and Andrew Lawton had both interviewed Caylan and published favourable interviews
• Jivraj contacted both men and threatened them with lawsuits if they did not remove the interviews
• Both removed their interviews
• Crichton later restored his interview after speaking with Caylan

Removal of the Danielle Smith Interview

• Caylan noticed her interview with Danielle Smith had been removed from the Corus network
• Corus told her it had been removed for editorial reasons
• Jivraj had threatened Corus with a libel lawsuit
• Corus asked Caylan to remove the interview from her own website

Importance of the Interviews

• It was important to Caylan to keep the interviews online because hundreds of publications were describing her as a white supremacist, terrorist sympathizer, Nazi, and someone unfit for polite society
• The interviews were the only way she could show the world who she really was
• They were her only means of defending herself
• She was trying to clear her name

Further Interference

• Cass Sunstein wrote about modern “stonings” (cancellations) and what drives people to participate in such campaigns
• “Mr. Wilson” responded to Sunstein, saying Caylan had cowered in the face of controversy and shown no moral courage
• Andy Signor, from Florida, reached out to Caylan and recorded a podcast with her about how people cope with being cancelled
• Before the podcast was published, Jivraj contacted Signor — both under a pseudonym and his real name — and threatened Signor and his associates
• Signor published the interview despite the threats

Testimony About Caylan’s Mental State

• A psychiatrist friend told her that her symptoms were the type long‑term disability benefits were designed for
• She applied for and received those benefits for about two years
• She did not feel good about being on benefits; she disliked receiving money she had not earned
• She remained unemployed
• She met with a therapist for talk therapy
• She suffered not only reputational harm but also severe psycho‑social and cognitive effects
• Her ability to complete tasks was impaired; she felt broken

Symptoms and Therapy

• In the immediate aftermath of March 2019, she was traumatized but still hoped she could clear her name
• As time passed — with no ability to publish essays, no responses to job applications, and interviews being taken down —
• She began to feel as though she was drowning in grief
• She welcomed the idea of death

Comment

• The egregious conduct of the Defendants was on full display
• Listening to the Magusiak podcast was disturbing and saddening; it revealed how nasty, cruel, and dishonest people can be in pursuit of ideological or political goals
• Caylan’s career and life were devastated

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?

Day 4

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.

NB:  I now have the tape of the conversation between Caylan and Jivraj reported in my Day 3 summary.  It is the conversation in which she disclosed to him that she knew about his treachery concerning the Phil incident and he denied and obfuscated.  It is a 25-minute-long tape but clearly identifies the character of each of them.  If interested, start at the 4 minute mark.   [click HERE to listen]  Tab 110.

DAY 4

Caylan again took the stand and testified to the effect that:

·      Licia Corbella, a Calgary Herald journalist, interviewed Caylan at length, and on Oct 13, she published a flattering profile of Caylan in the Herald;

·      Mountainview riding maintained a highly-confidential email address list of UCP members who lived in the riding;

·      As president of the constituency association, Jivraz could access this list;

·      On November 25, an email was sent to about 1400 of those party members in the riding;

·      the email was entitled Caylan Ford: Too Good to Live Here; Tab 57, [click HERE to view]

·      the email contained a letter purportedly signed by ”Mountain Vew Grassroots Conservatives”;

·      The letter, written by Jivraj, contained many false and derogatory accusations about Caylan; 

·      The letter alleged that Caylan was deceptive and evasive, a liar, arrogant, that she refused  to be honest and transparent, was disdainful of Mountainview residents, that she had never had a job in Calgary, she was not trustworthy, and that she thought of Mountainview as a pit stop on the way to Ottawa;

Caylan introduced her letter called “A Response To Your Concerns” clearly identifying the falsehoods in the “Too Good” letter.  [It is a good read] [click HERE to view] Tab: A Response To Your Concerns

She then continued:

·      Caylan asked Janice Herrington, Executive Director of the UCP to conduct a formal investigation into the “Too Good” letter and to terminate Jivraj;

·      after investigating, the Party issued an official public statement totally exonerating Caylan of the accusations made in that letter;

·      Members of the constituency board became unhappy with Jivraj;

·      the UCP Party gave Jivraj the option of resigning or being forced out as president; he resigned.

·      Caylan spoke highly of two of her opponents in the nomination contest, Jeremy Wong and Becca Polak;

·      Hlady [identified in Glossary] was for a short while a candidate in the nomination contest; the Party subsequently disqualified him;

·      Hlady was a Jivraj ally and published false material concerning Caylan;

·      Caylan’s campaign was progressing well; her volunteers had put in thousands of hours of work; the campaign was confident of success, especially after Jivraj was removed from the board;

·      There was a massive turnout for the nomination vote which Caylan won with 501 votes; the closest opponent, Wong, received  371;

·      although she had been successful in the nomination contest, Caylan had foreboding about Jivraj because she knew he would not stop trying to destroy her;

·      Press Progress was trying to assassinate Caylan; their articles became increasingly defamatory as time progressed; versions of or extracts from them were published across Canada on the air, in the press, and became ubiquitous on social media;

·      Caylan wrote Press Progress 6 different times informing them that their allegations about her were false and explaining why; for an example, Tab 58 [click HERE to view].

·      Press Progress did not change their articles after being informed they were false; they never interviewed Caylan or asked for a statement from her;

·      In Jauary or February 2019, Jivraj gave Press Progress the quotes which were later to appear in the damaging Press Progress Article of March 18;

·      Jivraj and Press Progress collaborated to withhold publication until it would “do the most damage”; that date turned out to be March 18;

·      In January, 2019, screen shot images of content from the Messages exchanged between Caylan and Jivraj in 2017 began appearing on social media; Caylan knew that Jivraj was responsible and became worried he would do worse;

·      Caylan filed a police report against Jivraj after someone unknown entered her house;

·      Thomas Lukaszik, former deputy premier of Alberta turned anti-Conservative activist, posted a Jivraj screen shot making adverse inferences about Caylan;

·      Jivraj filed a police report about Caylan accusing her of assault after she had touched him on the shoulder at a café; Caylan heard nothing from the police and assumed that they considered it a vexatious report;

·     Jivraj claimed that she had been investigated by the police

·      Starting in January or February 2018, both CBC and Toronto Star received material from “Whistleblower” containing 6 pages of deranged, conspiratorial allegations against Caylan, including an allegation of corruption;

·      Toronto Star later received a subsequent document from Whistleblower, it was 8 pages long, suggesting inflammatory headlines for Toronto Star articles about Caylan;

·      Whistleblower was  Jivraj;

·      CBC and Toronto Star both “sat upon” the Whistleblower allegations from January or February until March 18;

·      Neither of them contacted Caylan or inquired about those allegations until March 19;

·      Caylan’s campaign was going well; phone surveys showed she had more support than any other candidate; they were prepared and organized, had an experienced campaign manager, and had over 100 volunteers, Caylan was growing confident of electoral success;

·      March 18 was the critical day; the writ was to be dropped the next day;

·      Caylan’s campaign had a “launch party” at party HQ attended by about 12 volunteers; she had received shipment of 1000s of lawn signs; they were making a distribution plan and the door-knocking campaign; it was busy;

·      At about 4:00 PM Caylan first saw an email from the Press Progress reporter Lebrun [identified in Glossary] containing quotes of statements allegedly written by Caylan, stating that Press Progress intended to publish an article about Caylan containing those quotes, then asking questions of Caylan and demanding a response by 6:00 PM;

[The email is a critical document, Tab TB1000144, [click HERE to view] Go to the bottom of the exhibit and then scroll up for sequence.]

·      Caylan couldn’t tell whether the quotes were authentic because she had deleted her copies of the Messages;

·      Caylan knew that Press Progress had already published 3 false and defamatory articles about her and had never corrected any of them when given the true facts;

·      The questions asked in the email were loaded with embedded assumptions about her beliefs and those embedded assumptions were  false;

·      The unfair questions could never be answered in 2 hours;

·      she knew that Press Progress would not give any meaningful opportunity to respond, that their objective was to elect her NDP opponent;

·      she knew that Jivraj was the source of the quotes;

·      she knew that Press Progress wanted to keep Jivraj anonymous because of his sordid reputation; they were trying to mask him with credibility;

·      Caylan did not respond to Press Progress.

Court adjourned.

Testimony about the Press Progress publication was to the effect that:

·      it was published at 6:45 PM;

·      it was immediately picked up every Canadian news organization, and started circulating broadly on the internet;

·      none of the news organizations contacted her before publishing;

·      the NDP immediately published a press release entitled “UCP Candidate Complained ‘White Supremacist Terrorists’ Are Treated Unfairly’, Leaked Messages Show”;

·      pressure on the Party intensified; around 11:00 PM on March 18th, the Party asked her to resign as a candidate within 10 minutes;

·      she resigned;

·      Her resignation letter explained her situation Tab 61 [click HERE to view];

·      Lebrun was the editor of Press Progress and author of the article;

·      he knew that Jivraj had been making up lies about Caylan for a year;

Comment

After Caylan had decisively won the nomination contest to become the UCP candidate her prospects for election looked excellent despite the ongoing attempts by Jivraj and Press Progress to sabotage her.

March 18th changed everything; her political career was shattered on that day.

Press Progress knew how dishonest and treacherous Jivraj was because of their history publishing his false materials;

CBC should have known how dishonest and treacherous Jivraj was, both from Caylan’s resignation letter and, particularly, from the taped conversation;

Jivraj and Press Progress, with the help of the CBC, had succeeded in destroying her political career. 

The worst was yet to come.

Day 3

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.

Caylan again took the stand and continued testifying for the rest of the day.  She continued to explain that:

·      After she had learned of Jivraj’s dirty politics their friendship was severed, but she did occasionally communicate with him thereafter and tolerated his abusive ways because he had asked for her help and she tried to provide it;

·      When they ha been friends, Jivraj had told Caylan of a business in which he had been involved in the US that took money from customers but did not deliver as promised; he was concerned that his presence in Canada might become known to his victims;

·      In a later confrontational phone call between them, Jivraj accused her of being a traitor;

·      Jivraj moved to Calgary in May, 2017 and Caylan helped him find both employment and housing;

·      Jivraj ostensibly sought office as a Calgary federal MP candidate, and he raised funds from donors, but his supposed candidacy never appeared on any official party documents;

·      While on maternity leave Caylan was finishing her Masters thesis at Washington State U; the subject of the thesis was the crime of genocide;

·      She was also working on her Oxford degree in 2017 and tumultuous events were then occurring: the Syrian war and, in England, Brexit, immigration, immigrant criminal conduct, immigration backlash;

·      Caylan started thinking about returning to Calgary in 2016, she purchased a Calgary home in July 2017, took title to the home in October, and moved personal possessions to the house in December;

·      Caylan made 2 trips to Calgary in 2017, to coordinate renovations, to enroll her child in the Lycee, and to register with a midwifery as she was expecting her 2nd child;

·      To register for the midwifery Caylan needed to be an Alberta resident so she cancelled her Ontario drivers license and purchased an Alberta license; she considered herself an Alberta resident from that time forward;

·      Caylan developed an interest in becoming an electoral candidate in 2017, upon completing her move to Calgary in 2018, she talked to prominent Alberta Conservatives including Preston Manning;

·      Jason Kenney was then the leader of the UCP; Caylan attended an event at which he was speaking, asked questions in the Q and A, and talked with Kenney at the end of the meeting; the talk was about philosophy;

·      On a later date Caylan met with Kennedy and he encouraged her to seek a nomination to become a candidate; he told her that she would have to compete in a nomination contest to win the nomination; they discussed ridings and Caylan expressed a preference for Mountainview;

·      Caylan explained the candidate nomination process to the court and explained that it requires a majority vote of Party members in the constituency;

·      Caylan entered the nomination contest to become a candidate in Mountain;

·      Caylan read aloud an exhibit which was an email to her from Jivraj in which he stated that he was consumed by jealousy of Caylan and her accomplishments;

·      In March, 2018, Caylan attended a fund-raiser for the Party; Jivraj was present;

·      After the fundraiser, Alan Hallman (a power broker in UCP circles) invited some of those who had attended to an “after-party” at his house;

·      Both Caylan and Jivraj attended the after-party; he became drunk and asked Caylan to drive him home; during the drive home he told Caylan that those attending the after party hated her; she didn’t believe him;

·      Jivraj sent Caylan an email acknowledging that he was an asshole and apologizing; {click HERE to view]

·      Phil Schuman (“Phil”) was a Party nomination candidate in a different riding; he called Caylan and told her that he had heard rumours that she, Caylan, had accused him, Phil, of sexual harassment;

·      Caylan categorically denied the allegation and asked for his source; Phil disclosed that the source was Jivraj;

·      Phil then sent Caylan copies of the texts written by Jivraj saying that Caylan had made the allegations and Caylan realized that she had become a target of Jivraj;

·      Jivraj called Caylan and she, for the first and only time in her life, recorded the conversation;

·      The taped conversation was played aloud in court;

·      In the taped conversation, Caylan accused Jivraj of: making pernicious statements about her, disseminating vicious rumours, and having ulterior motives; she asked why he had said that she was a racist bigot and that people hated her;

·      Jivraj fervently denied Caylan’s accusations;

·      Caylan then told him that she had copies of the texts he had sent to Phil; she added that she didn’t want any part of him;

·      Caylan testied that Jivraj was a person of “habitual mendacity”;

·      Shortly thereafter, Phil suggested a meeting between the 3 of them and they agreed to meet at Merchants restaurant; Jivraj showed up late and drunk and offered Caylan a gift which she refused;

·      When confronted with the evidence, Jivraj asked all of them to put their phones on the table so there would be no recording;

·      Jivraj then explained that his malfeasance was a result of his alcoholism and acknowledged that he had been the source of the rumour about Caylan, he said that he was intending to go to AA and that Caylan had been the only person that had been kind to him;

·      Jivraj continued drinking through the meeting, incurred about $70 in alcohol expense and refused to pay at the end of the meeting;

·      After the meeting, at about 3:00 AM, Jivraj sent Caylan a stream of abusive texts accusing her of being a traitor and demanding that she delete the string of Messages they had exchanged;

·      Caylan did delete all of the Messages, and blocked Jivraj;

·      Later in March, Jivraj called Caylan and asked her to attend an AA meeting with him; she declined and recommended that he get a sponsor;

·      Caylan was obliged to inform her employer, the federal government, if she would be engaging in partisan politics, and she did so;

·      Caylan’s second baby was born;

·      Caylan developed a friendship with Sadiq, who was experienced in managing political campaigns and owned a polling company;

·      With the help of Sadiq and other volunteers Caylan developed and organized a campaign;

·      Caylan started door knocking and through the course of the campaign knocked on many thousand doors, more than any other candidate;

·      Caylan intended to use the domain name caylanford.ca for her campaign website;

·      She learned on May 2 that someone had purchased the domain name caylanford.ca  

·      After spending $1,000 investigating, she learned that it was Jivraj that had purchased the domain name;

·      She communicated with Jivraj and asked him to relinquish the name; he refused;

·      Caylan started a costly arbitration proceeding to get the domain name and ultimately Jivraj agreed to let her use her own name;

·      To enter the nomination contest Caylan needed 100 signatures from Party members in Mountainview; she started door knocking and selling memberships and obtained the necessary signatures;

·      She became a nomination candidate; raised $18K in campaign funds, recruited a strong volunteer team; printed campaign literature;

·      Caylan didn’t see Jivraj from late April until July, when he invited her to his campaign launch at Pete Club. She declined and wished him well.

·      A friend who had become involved in Jivraj’s campaign told Caylan that Jivraj was going to take over the Mountainview constituency board and destroy her;

·      The Mountainview constituency was a new constituency for the Party and had to become organized;

·      A Mountainview inauguration meeting was held and Jivraj was there with Hlady (see Glossary) who had once been an MLA in the riding and had some support;

·      Jivraj and Hlady “packed” the inauguration meeting and managed to elect Jivraj as a director and as president of Caylan’s Mountainview constituency board of directors; 

·      Jivraj then wrote a letter and then duped 9 members of the constituency board into signing it;

·      The letter is a key exhibit which can be viewed; {click HERE to view]

·      Later one of the duped board members wrote to Caylan, explaining that he was duped, apologizing, and telling of his suspicions of Jivraj; {click HERE to view]

·      The letter is a “Formal Conduct Complaint” and “Request for Investigation” into Caylan as a nomination candidate;

·      Both the letter and the Membership Application attached to it misstate the UCP eligibility rules

·      The letter then states that if both the misstated rules, and the facts stated about Caylan were correct,Caylan deliberately misrepresented herself to the Party and attempted to fraudulently circumvent Party rules; referred to Caylan as a “parachute candidate”;

·      The letter then goes on to pose a series of questions based on the assumption that the former statements about Caylan were true;

·      The letter is signed by the 9 members of the board but was not signed by Jivraj;

·      Jivraj widely circulated the letter on social media and arranged for its publication in Press Progress;

·      Caylan testified at length itemizing the falsehoods in the letter;

·      She explained that Jivraj’s statement of party rules was wrong;

·      The statement about her residency was wrong;

·      The term “parachute candidate” has 3 constituent elements which she stated

·      She did not have any of the 3 constituent elements;

·      Jivraj sent the letter to Press Progress, to the Calgary Herald, and to the CBC;

·      Press Progress published the letter but neither the Herald nor the CBC published it;

·      A Herald reporter talked to Caylan and she explained the falsity of the letter and the Herald did not publish

·      Caylan investigated and learned that Press Progress was in fact the Broadbent Institute, committed to the election of “progressive” (NDP) candidates;

·      Press Progress never identified the authors of its publications; never stated that the allegations were unproven; in articles about Caylan, they identified Caylan with disqualified candidates, suggesting that she should be disqualified;

·      Press Progress published the letter on October 13; they lighlighted  certain portions for emphasis;

·      No indication in Press Progress article that allegations were unproven;

·      The Press Progress article is still live on the Press Progress website;

Caylan introduced into evidence many derogatory publications about her; one of the many trial exhibits is at Tab 4: {click HERE to view].

Another: Tab 5 {click HERE to view].  

·      Caylan went thru the letter paragraph by paragraph and identified each of the many false statements or innuendos it contained; she told why they false;

·      Caylan wrote to the Party requesting an investigation about the letter and asking for the public removal of Jivraj as president and a member of the board;

·      The Party, after investigation, wholly cleared Caylan and confirmed that she was a legitimate candidate, but they did not remove Jivraj because the Party had due process requirements to remove constituency board members and those requirements could not be satisfied;

·      Also on Oct. 13, Lucia Corbella, a Herald columnist, wrote a very favorable profile of Caylan.

Court adjourned.

Comment

·      The taped conversation played aloud in court was shocking; it clearly demonstrated that Jivraj was a liar;

·      The day’s testimony was a compelling story of treachery.

Day 2

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.

Richard Harrison (“Richard”), who is Caylan’s Counsel, commenced his opening statement which lasted almost 3 hours.  He explained Caylan’s case, detailed the grievous conduct of each Defendant in turn, and gave reasons why the defences to defamation were not available to the Defendants.  He stated that:

·      The case dwarfs all prior defamation cases in Canada’s legal history because of both the severity of the defamations and the broad national scope of their publication;

·      Caylan had been described as a terrorist, a white supremist, a racist, homophobic, a bozo;

·      She is none of those things;

·      Caylan’s life and career were ruined by events which occurred in a period of a few hours on March 18, 2019;

·      Caylan became unemployable, became a social pariah, she lost friends and her marriage ended;

·      To make Caylan’s case he needed only to prove defamation, legally defined as anything that “lowered the reputation” of Caylan;

·      The Defendants had to defend by proving one of the 5 legal defences to defamation;

·      None of the legal defences were available to any of the Defendants and he explained why the none of those defences was available;

·      He would call 4 expert witnesses to testify of the mental distress and psychological damage suffered by Caylan;

Richard described Caylan in glowing terms and gave details of her education and many accomplishments.

Richard stated that he could and would prove that:

·      Jivraj was the sole source of the defamatory material;

·      Jivraj was “a unique individual in the worst connotation”; he was conniving, obsessive, deceitful, manipulative, Machiavellian;

·      The Defendants gave anonymity to Jivraj although they knew of his bad character;

·      None of the individuals responsible for the publications believed what they were publishing about Caylan;

·      Press Progress was guilty of “yellow journalism”, which he defined;

·      Both Broadbent Institute and CBC knew that Jivraj had “an axe to grind” against Caylan;

·      Press Progress had received the defamatory materials from Jivraj months before, but withheld publication until the eve of the election because Jivraj told them that it would then “do the most damage”;

·      CBC and Broadbent Institute were guilty of malice;

·      CBC lied to Caylan on 5 different occasions; Richard provided details of each such occasion;

·      The Toronto Star “piled on”, widely published 13 defamatory articles with large photos of Caylan, characterized Caylan as “promoting white supremacy”, but never explained exactly why that was the case;

·      journalist Defendant Emma McIntosh and Defendant lawyer Avnish Nanda (who wrote a piece for the Edmonton Journal and made multiple social media posts) echoed one another online to amplify defamatory statements about Caylan;

·       there was sheer recklessness in how Nanda operated; 

·       McIntosh’s comments were driven by rage,

·       Nanda published roughly 70 individual social media posts in which he repeatedly called Caylan a white supremacist.

·       Nanda never spoke to Ford before publishing any of the materials; Caylan asked to meet him for coffee for a dialogue but he declined;

Richard told of the witnesses he would call and what their testimony would be about and concluded his opening statement with the following quotation from Mr. Justice Strekaf’s decision in the Alberta lawsuit Kent v. Martin:

These cases involve the law of defamation.  Defamation is a tort that reflects a balancing of some important values in Canadian society, including the fundamental right to freedom of expression and an individual’s right to their reputation.  Also at play in these cases is the public interest in receiving fair and accurate information about candidates during an election campaign in a democratic society

Perry Mack, KC - defence Counsel for The Broadbent Institute then delivered an opening statement in which he first identified the legal defences to defamation and then stated that:

·      the main defence of Broadbent Institute was that a person, “cannot be defamed by your own words”, and that what Press Progress (Broadbent Institute) did was publish Caylan’s words;

·      Caylan had refused to explain the words she used after being asked to do so;

·      the subject publications were matters of public interest;

·      when Caylan became a political candidate she had no right to complain about publications in the public interest;

·      Jivraj was granted anonymity on legitimate grounds of “source privilege”;

·      Caylan’s words were not decontextualized; Caylan and Jivraj were “philosophical soulmates”;

·      The “fraudulent candidate” letter was signed by the board of Caylan’s constituency association;

·      Jivraj swore and provided to Broadbent Institute an affidavit in which he stated that the material he provided was true;

·      Broadbent employee Lebrun wrote to Caylan asking her to answer questions before the pp article was printed and she did not respond;

·      The Press Progress article was just a “list of quotations” and he read each quote;

·      defamation would not have occurred if Caylan had explained her words;

·      Jivraj was only a conduit;

·      The media had the right and duty to report on statements by persons seeking public office.

Mr. Mack’s opening statement was then concluded.

BREAK

Caylan took the stand and was sworn in.  She described her early life, (including that she quit drinking forever when she was 15 year old) how she became interested in politics, how her philosophical views evolved, how she became an activist involved with marginalized communities, particularly Falun Dafa, and the persecution of that sect by the Chinese Communist regime.  She continued her testimony to explain:

·       how she became a target of Chinese authority, how they watched and harassed her and tried to impede her activities, and of her experiences with the Chinese Consulate in Calgary;

·       how and where she obtained her graduate degree and 2 post-graduate degrees;

·       her activities with Congressional committees while living in Washington, DC and her activity on behalf of prisoners of conscience and the persecuted;

·       that “having a good time” to her meant engaging in dialectical conversations, learning about opposing views;

·       that upon graduating with her first Masters degree she was recruited by the Canadian government as a senior policy advisor in the Foreign Affairs ministry, and moved to Ottawa;

·       her role as senior policy advisor and some of her activities in that role;

·       that while expecting her first child she enrolled in Oxford to obtain a Masters degree in human rights law;

·       why she and her husband moved to Toronto after 5 years in Ottawa; that she continued to work with Foreign Affairs;

·       that she became involved in film making and became co-producer of Letter from Masanjia (2018),  which was about a hidden SOS note smuggled out of a labour camp in China, and which won an award for documentaries at the Calgary International Film Festival, and a co-writer of Ask No Questions (2020) which is about a Chinese religious minority framed for a suicide;

·       that she had decided to move to Calgary to raise her children, bought a house in Calgary in July 2017, got title in October, moved some goods into the house in December, and moved permanently into the house in April, 2018;

·       BREAK

·       How she met Jivraj at a political event while living in Toronto, was impressed by his interest in philosophy,  culture, and politics, became his Facebook friend, and how she commenced an extensive Facebook Messenger conversation with him, exchanging more than 600 Messages over a short period of time;

·       Talked about Tab 1 of Exhibits, which contains all the Messages exchanged; they completely fill a 3-inch binder;

·       it was from the ~600 tab 1 communications that Jivraj extracted snippets of conversation;

·       that she had to resort to a court proceeding to obtain the Messages because Jivraj would not consent to their release;

·       that she only obtained the Messages in 2022, and only then became able to defend herself;

·       that she learned how devious Jivraj was when he published false derogatory statements about a political personality and then re-published the same statements anonymously.

Comment

·       In my opinion Richard’s opening was very powerful;

·       Caylan has a huge vocabulary and expresses herself clearly and eloquently;

·       The defence that “no man can be defamed by his own words” is a legal principle, but is subject to many qualifications and exceptions;

·       If a defamation is published, the damage is done; posing questions to the victim hours before publication does not undo the damage;

·       Caylan was wise to not respond to the questions asked of her by Press Progress hours before the defamatory article was published; they were loaded questions about Caylan’s alleged philosophy, which was not at all her philosophy;

·       If a defamation is published the damage is done and asking for an explanation later does not undo that damage;

·       The “residency fraud” letter alleged by Broadbent Institute to have been signed “by the board” of Caylan’s constituency letter was in fact signed by 9 of the 26 members of that board;

·       Caylan is providing a great deal of detail, the importance of which may become important as the trial unfolds.

Day 1

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. 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 first day of the trial was fully taken up by preliminary evidentiary objections made by the Defendants.  Because the objections were preliminary in nature, the trial could not start until they had been heard. Madam Justice ultimately ruled on many of the objections, of which a few were sustained; most were dismissed, and a few were reserved.  These proceedings took up the whole day.

The Court adjourned for the day.

Comment
Not an interesting day. It was largely taken up with technical legal arguments mostly concerning the admissibility of evidence.