Opening arguments in the defamation trial between Carin Bondar and Barry Neufeld were heard in Chilliwack Law Courts Tuesday (Nov. 14).

The civil lawsuit alleges former school trustee Neufeld defamed Bondar, a school trustee, when he called her a 含羞草研究社渟triptease artist含羞草研究社� during an internet talk show in September 2022 broadcast by Action4Canada called the Empower Hour.

含羞草研究社淭his statement was false, injurious and not defensible as fair comment,含羞草研究社� said Bondar含羞草研究社檚 lawyer, Susanna Quail, in her opening statements.

It was day one of a six-day trial in B.C. Supreme Court in Chilliwack presided over by Justice Michael Stephens.

含羞草研究社淒r. Bondar is not a striptease artist,含羞草研究社� Quail said. 含羞草研究社淪he is an accomplished science communicator and educator and a school trustee.

含羞草研究社淭he defendant asserts that Dr. Bondar had explicit and highly sexualized public performances widely famed by her on a YouTube channel over a number of years.

含羞草研究社淎nd we say the evidence will show that that含羞草研究社檚 not true,含羞草研究社� the lawyer said.

The science education video in which Bondar appears to be swinging on a wrecking ball while scantily clad was not 含羞草研究社渟exually charged entertainment,含羞草研究社� Quail argued.

The video about evolution and natural selection was created by Bondar in 2014. It was a parody of the pop hit Wrecking Ball by Miley Cyrus, and Bondar含羞草研究社檚 video was called 含羞草研究社淥rganisms do Evolve.含羞草研究社�

In the video, Bondar is wearing what the pop superstar wore 含羞草研究社� a white tank top, underwear and boots. The video was filmed almost shot for shot in similar fashion, and for a brief moment on-screen, the plaintiff appeared nude in several frames.

Bondar含羞草研究社檚 PhD dissertation focused on animal reproduction and led to her ongoing interest in popular science education.

含羞草研究社淲hile her work often draws on human sexual behaviour, it含羞草研究社檚 not actually about human sexuality,含羞草研究社� Quail told the court.

含羞草研究社淚t含羞草研究社檚 about animal biology.含羞草研究社� And it often uses pop culture to 含羞草研究社渆ngage viewers,含羞草研究社� she said.

The online content that Bondar has produced 含羞草研究社渋s mildly titillating in a silly way,含羞草研究社� Quail said.

Bondar含羞草研究社檚 work has been featured on the Discovery Channel, the Science Channel, National Geographic, Scientific American and Animal One.

Quail said the court would determine if the striptease comment could be considered 含羞草研究社渇air comment含羞草研究社� and that would likely form the 含羞草研究社渞eal test of where this case lies.含羞草研究社�

Bondar is alleging that 含羞草研究社淢r. Neufeld defamed her by this comment and seeks damages,含羞草研究社� the lawyer said, adding that evidence would show general and aggravated damages were appropriate.

Quail said Neufeld 含羞草研究社渉as not only refused to retract or apologize for the remark, but repeated it and included it in his fundraising materials,含羞草研究社� which she said was 含羞草研究社渙utrageous and malicious含羞草研究社� in that it increased the plaintiff含羞草研究社檚 mental distress.

In terms of the legal framework, three elements have to be established in a claim of defamation under the law, Quail said.

One of them focuses on injury to someone含羞草研究社檚 reputation, in that they 含羞草研究社渢end to lower the plaintiff含羞草研究社檚 reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person.含羞草研究社�

Bondar含羞草研究社檚 lawyer said that all three would be 含羞草研究社渨ell-established.含羞草研究社�

Neufeld has pleaded 含羞草研究社渏ustification,含羞草研究社� among three defences, but Quail said the evidence will show 含羞草研究社渉e knew full well含羞草研究社� that Bondar is not a striptease artist.

含羞草研究社淭his is simply not who Dr. Bondar is or what she has achieved,含羞草研究社� the lawyer said.

The three defences Neufeld filed in connection with the suit were: justification, fair comment and qualified privilege.

含羞草研究社淣one of these defences can succeed,含羞草研究社� Quail said.

She told the court Bondar would testify about 含羞草研究社渉ow hurtful and frustrating含羞草研究社� it was to have her reputation as an accomplished science educator 含羞草研究社渞eplaced with an entirely fictional narrative that she is an underdog striptease artist, scrabbling her way to public office,含羞草研究社� Quail said.

In conclusion, Quail said the libel case is 含羞草研究社渘ot about balancing the public interest含羞草研究社� and it isn含羞草研究社檛 about 含羞草研究社渁 political contest含羞草研究社� over SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) 123.

含羞草研究社淭his case is only about defamation,含羞草研究社� she said.

含羞草研究社淭his case isn含羞草研究社檛 about Mr. Neufeld含羞草研究社檚 personal political agenda. This trial is not a social movement showdown, it含羞草研究社檚 not about culture wars.

含羞草研究社淭his is actually a very straightforward application of the law of defamation which exists to protect reputations from exactly the kind of harm Mr. Neufeld has inflicted and continues to do so.含羞草研究社�

Neufeld含羞草研究社檚 lawyer, Paul Jaffe, began his cross examination Tuesday, and it continued Wednesday. The trial is expected to run until at least Tuesday.

RELATED:

RELATED: