Craig ‘sexually harassed staffer’
A High Court judge has ruled former Conservative Party leader Colin Craig was defamed by political blogger Cameron Slater during the fallout of the 2014 election.
But the judgment will be cold comfort to Craig, who was found to have committed ‘‘moderately serious sexual harassment’’ of his former press secretary, Rachel MacGregor, on multiple occasions from early 2012 to 2014.
The judge also declined to award any damages to Craig for the defamation, saying much of the damage caused to his reputation was done by his own actions.
The decision, released by Justice Kit Toogood yesterday, relates to the May, 2017, trial where both Craig and Slater sued each other for defamation.
At the heart of the trial was the issue of whether or not Craig sexually harassed MacGregor during the time she worked for him. MacGregor resigned two days before the 2014 general election, claiming she had been sexually harassed by Craig.
Slater later published on his Whaleoil blog critical articles about Craig’s actions towards MacGregor, including that he had sexually harassed MacGregor.
In response to the blog posts, Craig published a booklet entitled Dirty Politics and Hidden Agendas which stated Slater had published fabricated details about his relationship with MacGregor.
It was this publication which Slater said was defamatory.
Justice Toogood ruled Craig was not defamed on the majority of points he advanced in the court case but had been defamed by two statements published on Whaleoil which were subsequently repeated five times.
The publications were defamatory because they were not true, Justice Toogood ruled.
While Craig had been defamed, it was largely due to his own actions, Justice Toogood said. This was, in part, because Craig breached a confidentiality agreement between himself and MacGregor which fuelled the firestorm of publicity around their relationship.
‘‘I have also held that the reputational damage which Mr Craig suffered throughout the events traversed at length in this judgment resulted almost entirely from his own actions.
‘‘To the extent, if any, that his reputation suffered further damage because of the two defamatory statements for which I have held the defendants to be liable, I am more than satisfied that the declarations that he was defamed in that way provide adequate vindication.’’
Slater had not been defamed by Craig, Justice Toogood ruled.
Dirty Politics and Hidden Agendas had untrue statements in it but they were not considered defamatory because Craig had the right to defend himself against the allegations posted on Whaleoil. ‘‘Because the core allegations about Mr Craig’s relationship with Ms MacGregor and related matters had received widespread publication throughout New Zealand, I have found that Mr Craig’s decision to distribute the booklet to every New Zealand household was a justifiable response,’’ the judgment read.
‘‘I find that the untrue statements in the Dirty Politics and Hidden Agendas booklet were made on an occasion of qualified privilege in reply to an attack on him by Mr Slater and that the privilege was not lost. On that basis, Mr Slater’s counterclaim in defamation is dismissed.’’
Justice Toogood stated Slater’s controversial blog had the same rights as a national newspaper, radio station or television channel. This allowed Slater to engage the new responsible communication defence to defamation.
‘‘To hold that Mr Slater was deprived of the defence of responsible communication on a matter of public interest, merely because of his views about Mr Craig, would be to tilt the balance between freedom of expression on a matter of public interest and protection of reputation too far in favour of the latter.
‘‘Such a finding would have an unduly chilling effect on political discourse of the kind which the public interest defence is designed to recognise.’’
SEXUAL HARASSMENT
A large part of the judgment traversed the relationship between Craig and MacGregor.
Craig hired MacGregor as his press secretary for the 2011 and 2014 elections.
Their ‘‘emotional affair’’ has since been aired publicly in numerous court cases which have followed the demise of Craig’s political career.
That included Craig writing letters and poems to MacGregor, and their infamous kiss on election night 2011.
MacGregor has since admitted the kiss was consensual but, following on from then, Craig’s advances, messages, letters and poems were not welcome.
Justice Toogood said that during the early period of her employment MacGregor was ‘‘infatuated by her position’’ as Craig’s press secretary.
However, it was clear that Craig had ‘‘exploited his clearly dominant position’’ over MacGregor.
‘‘It is true that Mr Craig was guilty of moderately serious sexual harassment of Ms MacGregor, on multiple occasions from early 2012 to 2014 by telling her that he remained romantically inclined and sexually attracted to her, and that those expressions of his views were not welcomed by Ms MacGregor at the time they were communicated to her. Ms MacGregor chose not to complain about the harassment because of her concern about the effect of a complaint on her employment,’’ Justice Toogood said.
During the 2017 trial, MacGregor was a witness for Slater and was cross-examined by Craig. It took ‘‘little imagination’’ to understand ‘‘how distressing’’ that process was for MacGregor, Toogood said.
‘‘Mr Craig represented himself in this proceeding. Although his conduct in the hearing was entirely proper, I understand that Ms MacGregor’s experience in the witness box was made more distasteful because she was required to answer questions put to her by Mr Craig himself.’’
The judgment, which was over a year in the making, comes a month after Craig and MacGregor’s defamation trial ended.
Justice Anne Hinton is currently deliberating on whether Craig defamed MacGregor, and MacGregor defamed Craig in turn.
It is not known when her decision will be released.