Jury dismissed in Kent defamation case
CALGARY — A defamation trial involving a former television war correspondent is going ahead in front of a judge alone after the jury was dismissed over an opening statement deemed too prejudicial.
Justice Jo’Anne Strekaf said Arthur’s Kent’s lawyer made several inappropriate remarks as the trial began Monday and it would be unfair to continue after what the jurors heard.
“Given the number of inappropriate statements and the serious nature of many of those statements ... and the difficulty of overcoming the damage caused by the statements, I have concluded that it would not be possible to correct the damage done to trial fairness,” she said Tuesday.
“As a result it would be unfair to the defendants in this case to proceed before this jury.”
Kent, 61, is suing Postmedia, the National Post and former columnist Don Martin over a column that ran when he was campaigning for a seat in Calgary for the Progressive Conservatives in the 2008 provincial election.
The Alberta-born Kent acquired the nickname “Scud Stud” when he reported for NBC during the 1991 Persian Gulf War often going live as Iraqi Scud missiles were launched.
He was narrowly defeated after a campaign in which a piece by Martin appeared under the headline “Alberta’s ’Scud Stud’ a ‘Dud’ On Campaign Trail.”
Kent’s lawyer characterized the column as a “false article” that failed to meet even “ordinary journalistic standards.”
“You’ll come to learn that the news report did intend to harm. It was not in accordance with the rules of responsible journalism,” Kent Jesse told jurors Monday.
“Not only did the defendants publish an article that was unfair, hurtful ... but they did so with malicious intent.”
Martin “asked only for dirt” from his sources, he added.
“The malicious intent, apparent in the news report, was adopted and condoned by the newspaper, who published the news report not just on that day and not just in the one newspaper, but other newspapers and numerous websites.”
Postmedia lawyers immediately demanded a mistrial. They said Jesse impugned Martin’s reputation by claiming he had written the column maliciously and Postmedia had known it was inaccurate and kept it online for five years.
The judge agreed that rather than telling the jury what he intended to prove, Jesse was presenting statements as fact.
“I simply reached a conclusion that in the circumstances it would be inappropriate to proceed before this jury,” Strekaf ruled.
Kent indicated he would be willing to go ahead with only a judge. Postmedia lawyers agreed.
The column, which was published in several newspapers that were part of what was then the CanWest chain, suggested the Kent campaign was in disarray, that the candidate was not cooperating with the provincial PC party and that a number of key campaign members were threatening to quit. It included information and quotes from unidentified party members.
After the jury was dismissed, a senior member of Kent’s campaign team took the stand and testified then-party president Bill Smith warned them to make sure Kent “toed the line” after the candidate spoke out against the party and its leader, Ed Stelmach.
But Mike Skwara said he had no indication there was any dissension within the Kent campaign.
He was blunt when recalling his initial reaction to the column.
“Horse patootie,” he said. “The team wasn’t ready to quit. I certainly wasn’t ready to quit. We were all there working hard.”