Former Chilliwack trustee files court appeal after losing defamation lawsuit to current SD33 trustee

The case in the Supreme Court of British Columbia arose after Neufeld, a former multi-term trustee, referred to Dr. Bondar as a “strip-tease artist” during an Empower Hour segment, but did not mention her by name. The Empower Hour segment occurred on September 21, 2022 during which time Neufeld stated, “Richard Procee ran against that strip-tease artist in the by-election four years ago.” The actual by-election occurred in early 2021.

“Well before September 21, 2022, Dr. Bondar had a significant presence on the Internet, with 150 million views of her videos. Whether or not any such videos reflected a dictionary definition of ‘strip-tease’, some were certainly sexually explicit and suggestive. In Mr. Neufeld’s honestly held opinion, these videos present legitimate grounds for comment in the Chilliwack school board political arena,” Neufeld’s appeal statement of facts argued.

In his April 2024 ruling, Justice K. Michael Stephens said Neufeld incorrectly characterized Bondar as a strip-tease artist and found that equating, or substantially equating, Bondar with that of a strip-tease artist based on a fleeting image of her in a science-themed parody video did not accurately portray her. Justice Stephens said this “was an effort to discredit his opponent in a school board trustee election, which crossed the line and constituted defamation,” adding that Neufeld’s words were defamatory and no defences were made against his remarks.

Justice Stephens said he did not accept Neufeld’s argument that Dr. Bondar “willingly entered an ideologically charged political arena that is known for use of ‘intemperate, offensive or harsh language.'”

Neufeld had argued that there was a collateral purpose behind Dr. Bondar’s defamation lawsuit, but the judge in this matter did not agree. Justice Stephens said Dr. Bondar had experienced stress and anxiety as a result of the impugned words.

Justice Stephens said Neufeld has refused to apologize to Dr. Bondar or retract his comment.

While recognizing that the impugned words led to anxiety and reputational harm associated with the impugned words, Justice Stephens declined to institute a larger measure of general damages. He said Dr. Bondar had already experienced negative comments associated with the parody video during the February 2021 by-election campaign, and confirmed that a billboard was put up by the road in Chilliwack with a screenshot of Dr. Bondar from the parody video. Further, he said Dr. Bondar testified that she had been approached by people in her community who were supportive of her, but “this is despite their perception of her as a result of the impugned words. For example, they have said, ‘We got you, we know you had a past.'” Justice Stephens said Dr. Bondar told the court that this upsets her.

According to court filings, Dr. Bondar has been a biologist and science communicator who hosted a variety of of educational scientific series online and on TV. She is an adjunct professor at the University of the Fraser Valley. Her lawyers vehemently disputed the claim that Dr. Bondar was a strip-tease artist. A video that previously circulated in the Chilliwack community back in 2021 showed Dr. Bondar on a wrecking ball, but there was a purpose behind the video, her counsel asserted.

“In many of her educational YouTube videos, Dr. Bondar appears scantily clad,” court documents argue. “The video is a parody of a music video by pop singer Miley Cyrus, in which Cyrus is scantily clad. In Dr. Bondar’s video she sings a song about the science of evolution and the importance of relying on scientific evidence to understand the natural world. Dr. Bondar recreated many aspects of the video in her parody, including Cyrus’s style of dress. The video is not a strip-tease.”

The parody video was released in 2014 and, according to Dr. Bondar’s lawyers, received positive attention at the time of its release, including praise on popular websites like Discover Magazine and Business Insider. In 2021, when Dr. Bondar campaigned and was first elected as a school trustee, the video was used against Dr. Bondar to malign her character and integrity on the basis of her perceived inappropriate behaviour as a woman, her lawyers argued.

Prior to the start of oral arguments, Dr. Bondar released a statement to Fraser Valley Today through Facebook Messenger, saying she looked forward to having the issue addressed in court.

“I welcome this issue having its day in court. My legal team and I have prepared our case with ample supporting evidence. Although it continues to take an emotional toll, it remains critically important for women in politics to stand up against smear campaigns dedicated to decreasing our desire to serve. The only way forward is through,” Dr. Bondar said in her statement.

In Neufeld’s response filed with the court, he said he was a retired corrections, probation and restorative justice facilitation officer, a capacity he served in from 1981 until 2008. He served seven terms on the Chilliwack school board from 1992-2008 and 2011-2022, when he was not reelected as a trustee in October 2022.

According to his response filed with the B.C. Supreme Court, Neufeld says he attracted considerable attention over his last two terms in office by criticizing a program in the schools that he perceived as indoctrinating children to certain gender ideology. Neufeld took issue with sexual orientation and gender ideology (SOGI123) policies because of their potential for far-reaching, adverse implications for children, he said.

In early 2018, Neufeld states, the B.C. Teachers’ Federation and Canadian Union of Public Employees, whose public sectors unions were instrumental in developing and promoting SOGI123, instituted two separate campaigns against Neufeld at the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal on the belief that his criticism of SOGI policies violated B.C. human rights codes.

Neufeld goes on to say that Dr. Bondar’s partner and fiancee, Peter Lang, was the petitioner in a SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) lawsuit against him. Neufeld states Lang’s claim was funded by the B.C. Federation of Labour and was summarily dismissed under B.C.’s Protection of Public Participation Act.

As for the reference to a strip-tease artist, Neufeld said, “If anybody watching the September 21, 2022 Zoom meeting did, in fact, infer that the words ‘striptease artist’ meant the plaintiff, it is because of the plaintiff’s past reputation. Such notoriety was due, in part, because of her sexualized performances posted on YouTube which were controversial, and in my view, extraordinarily unique for anybody running for public office. She defended herself regarding these performances, such as with Global News on February 14, 2021. In my view, the plaintiff’s ‘entire body of work’ demonstrates her passion for deviant sexuality and performance art.”

In the end, Justice Stephens ordered Neufeld to pay Dr. Bondar $35,000 in general damages and $10,000 in punitive damages. If the two parties cannot agree on costs, they may provide submissions on costs in writing.

by Mike Vanden Bosch

Former Chilliwack trustee files court appeal after losing defamation lawsuit to current SD33 trustee

More Local News