HALIFAX: The lawyer representing three of the four people implicated in a defamation lawsuit launched by former Richmond County Warden Steve Sampson cited the right of his clients to hold elected officials to account.
David Hutt made the remarks in an interview with The Reporter two days after filing a statement of defense in Nova Scotia Supreme Court on behalf of Richmond County’s former director of tourism and economic development, Jeff Stanley, as well as Stanley’s sister-in-law Ellen Polegato and his father-in-law Geno Polegato .
According to a press release issued by Sampson on October 11, the trio, along with recently re-elected Richmond municipal councillor Gilbert Boucher, allegedly used anonymous Facebook accounts to post false and defamatory comments about Sampson under the names “Jake Sampson” and “Jim Davis” on the Facebook group ‘Taxpayers of Richmond County NS.”
In requesting that Bell Canada and Seaside Communications release the names and addresses of customers whose internet provider (IP) addresses matched those connected to the names “Jake Sampson” and “Jim Davis,” Supreme Court Justice Michael Wood suggested that the nature and number of the Facebook posts in question superseded the posters’ right to their anonymity.
However, Hutt countered that this ruling is not relevant to the current case, which seeks to determine whether the posts in question can be considered libelous in a court of law.
“He was looking at whether their anonymity should be preserved, but at this point, their anonymity is gone,” Hutt pointed out, adding that the defendants had few options available to them in terms of raising the issues discussed in their Facebook posts.
“There are a lot of public policy reasons why anonymity would be protected in certain circumstances, particularly in an area like Richmond County where, at the time, there was no whistleblower legislation at all. So there was no way to protect a person from reprisal if they sought accountability from their elected council.”
Hutt added that his interpretation of the five specific “Jake Sampson” and “Jim Davis” posts to be considered in this particular suit places the onus on court officials to consider whether the posts in question fall under the heading of fair comment.
He also contended that much of the material posted under these pseudonyms earlier this year was borne out by the October releases of a draft report by Nova Scotia’s Office of the Ombudsman and the forensic audit conducted by Boyne Clarke in conjunction with Grant Thornton.
“Truth is an absolute defense to defamation,” Hutt insisted. “A person cannot be defamed by words that are true.”
Hutt’s legal case is also designed to prove that neither Stanley nor Geno Polegato actually contributed to any of the Facebook posts currently under consideration as part of the Sampson defamation case.
“This case is a good illustration of the sometimes-loose connection between IP addresses and people behind them,” Hutt remarked.
“A person can be posting to an iPad that’s attached to anyone’s Wi-Fi, and many of us have Wi-Fi at home right now.”
