Anti-gay activist Bill Whatcott being sued for $104 million

OTTAWA (CCN)



A $104-million class action lawsuit against anti-gay activist Bill Whatcott threatens anyone defending traditional Christian sexual morality, warned lawyer Tom Schuck.

“It’s really not Bill Whatcott who’s at issue and people included in the claim,” said the Weyburn, Sask., lawyer, who represented Schuck pro bono all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada on hate speech charges and on a dozen other cases. “It’s anybody who speaks out on traditional Christian sexual morality that is threatened.”

“If Bill Whatcott can be sued for hurting the feelings of gay people, then the Catholic Church can be sued for hurting the feelings of gay people by what they put in the Catechism,” said Schuck, a member of the Catholic Civil Rights League.

Schuck is not the only voice raising concerns.

“We think of Canada as a free country that values the public exchange of ideas,” said the editor of the online magazine Culture Witness, Lea Singh, who is also a lawyer. “But lawsuits like this are a direct threat to the lively public debate that is vital to a flourishing democracy. They make people afraid of speaking up for fear of being financially destroyed by high legal fees.”

Douglas Elliott of Cambridge LLP announced the class action suit by his firm at an Aug. 12 news conference in Ottawa. Joining him were lead plaintiffs former Liberal Deputy Premier George Smitherman and gay activist Christopher Hudspeth

Elliott described two classes of plaintiffs: those represented by Hudspeth and Smitherman, who legitimately signed up to march in the Toronto Gay Pride Parade last July; and those who received pamphlets the “zombies” handed out that were similar to those described by the Supreme Court of Canada as hate speech.

Whatcott lied to enter the parade by using an assumed name and claiming to represent the Gay Zombies Cannabis Consumers’ Association, Elliott said. He also did not get prior approval from the March organizers for his pamphlets. The lawsuit also attaches the others who posed as Gay Zombies, wearing skin tight green rubber body suits that disguised their identities. The lawsuit also seeks an injunction so Whatcott cannot do this again.

The lawsuit also goes after anyone who may have assisted Whatcott such as: “those who paid for airfare, put him up, paid to print the pamphlets, anyone who helped him in any way could be on the hook for $100 million,” said Elliott.

The lawsuit also includes a subgroup of plaintiffs: those Liberals who marched in the parade who were “defamed” by the pamphlets, he said such as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Liberal Premier Kathleen Wynne and “all known and self-identified Liberals who marched in the parade.”

“Most people would probably laugh at the suggestion that Whatcott’s flyers in any way harmed the reputations of Justin Trudeau or Kathleen Wynne, or caused mental anguish for over a million people,” said Singh. “The case ought to be thrown out of court, but the plaintiffs have selected their legal strategy for a reason.”

“While few defamation lawsuits ever go to trial, Ontario is still one of the world’s most friendly jurisdictions for these lawsuits. Just ask Ezra Levant, who was fined $80,000 in 2014 for ‘defaming’ a Muslim law student in a strongly worded opinion piece.”

“Legal scholars, journalists and others have been advocating for years that Ontario’s antiquated defamation laws be reformed to better protect free speech, but so far these laws have stayed put,” she said.

Elliott said all class members are “automatically included” unless they opt out in a court process that will be available later. The lawsuit goes after Whatcott and his group for “civil conspiracy” and for creating “mental suffering.”

“This is the third pride parade Whatcott has lied his way into,” said Hudspeth. “I plan to see this is the last time he gets away with it.”

Hudspeth, who said he grew up in a fundamentalist Pentecostal home, described Whatcott as “a notorious homophobe,” who “infiltrated our pride parade.”

“Pride needs to be a safe space for everyone,” he said.

“Promoting homophobia is a great way of raising money among other fundamentalists,” said Hudspeth who used to work for 100 Huntley Street. “There’s no doubt in my mind, some fundamentalist group either here or in the United States is backing these activities. We need to smoke them out.”

Campaign Life Coalition also received a legal letter from Cambridge LLP, regarding a story LifeSiteNews.com had posted about Whatcott’s participation in the parade that also included a link to the “offensive literature”.

“By publishing this story with the link, you have published a libel against our clients and have acted in furtherance of Whatcott’s civil conspiracy,” it said. “Our clients require that you to take down the story immediately, or at a minimum, to remove the imbedded link. Failure to do so may result in further legal action against your organization without further notice to you.”

Campaign Life President Jim Hughes said they wrote back to say they were not involved either in the publication of the story or in helping Whatcott. LifeSiteNews is a separate legal entity.

Hughes said he had thought Whatcott was living in the Philippines. “He’s a guy who’s been through hell personally and he doesn’t want anyone else to go through he’s experienced. As the result of that he takes every opportunity to tell people about a lifestyle that has hurt him greatly. He doesn’t want anyone else to experience what he has.”

LifeSiteNews co-founder and managing editor Steve Jalsevac said they have not heard from the plaintiffs and he doubted he would “because their complaint about LifeSite is a very huge stretch.”

“Essentially they are demanding any news service cannot report the complete news about Whatcott and his associates did during that Gay Pride Parade,” he said. “They want such information totally withheld from the public, except if it’s reported in a manner that would support their own particular views.”

LifeSite published “an objective, factual report and did not express any support for Bill Whatcott,” he said, noting other news outlets also picked up the story.

Just as the Supreme Court of Canada published the two pamphlets it said were hate speech, LifeSite provided a link to the pamphlets passed out at the parade so people could go to Whatcott’s website “to see it for themselves,” he said. “I’m sure many who did go to that website and looked at that pamphlet would have been very negative about it.”

Schuck said he represented Whatcott on about dozen cases. “We’ve successfully sued the CBC for libel,” he said. He also acted for Whatcott on some criminal matters as well as against the licensing body that threatened to take away Whatcott’s license as a practical nurse for picketing out in front of Planned Parenthood. “The only partial loss was in the Supreme Court of Canada,” he said. The Court determined two of the four pamphlets Whatcott had circulated were hate speech.

Schuck, who is winding down his practice, is not representing Whatcott in this case, as he is not an expert in class action civil suits. Whatcott was able to raise about 15 per cent of the costs of various lawsuits through donations, he said. “There are people who would want to assist Bill in making sure he gets a defense.”

Ontario Lawyer Charles Lugosi has agreed to represent Whatcott, who said on his website he has raised about $5,000 for his defence.