Laurier releases statement in Jordan Peterson lawsuit

University says staff wasn’t responsible for creation or dissemination of audio recording

WATERLOO — Wilfrid Laurier University has released its statement of defence in a suit initiated by University of Toronto Prof. Jordan Peterson earlier this year.

Peterson’s $1.5 million lawsuit alleges leaked comments made about him by three Laurier staff in a private meeting with teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd last fall were defamatory, but the school argues the university and co-defendants were not responsible for creating or releasing the audio, that Peterson had prior knowledge the audio recording would be released, and Peterson has experienced “significantly increased financial and professional success” since the recording went public.

The statement of defence was filed on behalf of the university and former staff member Adria Joel, who was on a limited-term contract at the time of the meeting. Two other co-defendants, professors Nathan Rambukkana and Herbert Pimlott, are being represented by separate counsel and will file their own statement of defence, the school said.

“As previously stated, the university intends to vigorously defend itself against this lawsuit,” the statement reads. The university will not comment further on the lawsuit or its defence.

Peterson is seeking $500,000 for defamation, $500,000 for injurious falsehood and $500,000 in punitive damages. The claims have not been tested in court, and Laurier is asking that damages awarded to Peterson, if any, will not exceed $100,000.

The Peterson claim alleges the defamatory comments were made during a meeting with Shepherd last November after she played clips of a TVO debate between Peterson and Nicholas Matte about gender-neutral pronouns in a Nov. 1, 2017 communications studies tutorial class.

It claims 14 defamatory statements were made, including a comparison of Peterson’s comments to a speech by Adolf Hitler, comparing Peterson’s views to alt-right or white supremacist opinions, comments that Peterson was “academically suspect” and exhibits “charlatanism,” and a statement that Peterson was “spreading transphobia.”

Laurier’s defence claims Shepherd recorded most of the meeting “unbeknownst to the other attendees at the meeting,” and the public dissemination of statements made by the defendants during a private meeting was not the “probable or foreseeable consequence” of those statements.

Laurier says Shepherd shared the recording with Christie Blatchford at the National Post and subsequently released it to multiple media outlets and posted it online. Shepherd also contacted Peterson to ask about releasing it, and Laurier says Peterson consented, “explicitly or implicitly,” and that “any damages that the plaintiff may have suffered are due to the actions of Shepherd in posting the impugned words to YouTube.”

Shepherd told the Record Friday that she did not post the recording to YouTube, and was hesitant about letting the National Post release it. She also said Peterson never consented to the release of the audio, she merely reached out to tell him she was doing it and wanted him to know.

The university’s defence also claims the comments in the lawsuit were taken out of context, and “were fair comments made in good faith and without malice on matters of public interest.”

Laurier is also facing a $3.6million lawsuit from Shepherd related to the meeting, but the university will file a separate statement of defence in that lawsuit. The process has been delayed by procedural issues that are currently being addressed, Laurier said.

The university argues Peterson’s lawsuit was not filed in good faith after the professor made a video statement on his YouTube channel saying he hoped the two lawsuits “would be enough to convince university professors and administrators to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words.”

The university says Peterson hasn’t suffered any damages as a result of the recording going public. “Leaving aside the fact that the defendants made no public statements about Peterson, the further fact is that Peterson’s star has risen significantly since November 1, 2017,” the defence claims.

Efforts to contact Peterson’s lawyer about the statement of defence went unanswered.