Updated – letters on O-M mayor’s suit over newspaper comment

Missing the point

Letter to the Packet & Times  from Don Morgan, Midland – June 23 2017

Re: “Unfair suggestion,” letter to the editor, June 20

The real truth is that this case had nothing to do with AWARE Simcoe.

As Ann Truyens stated in the newspaper article, she was only representing herself as a long-time resident of Oro-Medonte Township when she made the comments in the paper and in the letter she sent to the township regarding the controversial Burl’s Creek fiasco.

They were her personal comments, nothing to do with AWARE or any other citizens group.

In regards to using a fictitious name to comment in the Orillia Packet & Times, most people who commented in the paper used a fictitious name. And her comments were made about issues that are important to the residents of Oro-Medonte, not so-called cyber-bullying.

If, as Deputy Judge Kinnear stated, Hughes’s claims had “substantial merit” and Truyens had “no valid defence,” why would Hughes drop the lawsuit and not let it go to trial?

And the long delay that letter writer Ron Doyle claims was caused by the anti-SLAPP motion filed by Truyens is complete nonsense.

Truyens has consistently stood by her principles and belief that she had done nothing wrong because she has the legal right to freedom of expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

And as a public servant elected by the residents of Oro-Medonte, the mayor has to be open to criticism and be transparent and accountable to the people he serves.

That has certainly not been the case!

Unfair suggestion

Letter to the Packet & Times from Ron Doyle, Oro-Medonte  – June 23 2017

Re: “The truth of the matter,” letter to the editor, June 15

The unjust inferences continue concerning Mayor Harry Hughes through Allan Baker’s letter to the editor. I would like to express a civil, rational opinion that I believe is more the general opinion of the residents of Oro-Medonte.

Baker’s letter to the editor seemingly contends there is a lack of honestly and transparency in all elected officials. This is an unfair, all-inclusive suggestion. I believe this to not be true of the present Oro-Medonte council.

If Baker chose to lead by example, he would likely have disclosed that he and Truyens are long-standing members of the politically based group AWARE Simcoe. Their members are prominent in groups that seemingly work to discredit those holding elected offices to cause turnovers on council. Support, of course, would likely be there for candidates of the same political lean.

Is it possible that Baker was among the Save Oro picketers against Burl’s Creek as well as among the group that “marched” on Mayor Hughes’s home late at night to further the protest? If true, then transparency and honesty would show his prejudice against Mayor Hughes in writing his letter.

The court ruled that Hughes’s claims of Truyens’s defamation when hiding behind a fictitious name to cyberbully the mayor and his family had “substantial merit.” Additionally, the court ruled that Truyens had “no valid defence” to the defamatory comments. Truyens’s failed anti-SLAPP attempt to have the case dismissed in a heavily backlogged court system caused a long delay.

Please note that had Truyens not settled after the failed attempt, they would have been both cross-examined under oath.

Sadly, we all know the tragic consequences of cyberbullying. To permit it is to promote it.

Is Baker’s letter a thinly veiled attempt of yet another example of “accusation without any real evidence,” and furthermore, does it condone cyberbullying? Might the true cause of Baker’s seeming quest for the truth be that Mayor Hughes had the courage to challenge AWARE and hold its members accountable?

Baker could best effect the change he advocates by running for elected office. Ideally, he might run for mayor of Oro-Medonte! Doing so would require the courage and tenacity of the incumbent, who could, like a former long-standing mayor to the south, be aptly dubbed “Hurricane Harry.”

The truth of the matter is, as I understand it, Mayor Hughes suspected a possible conflict of interest, acted ethically and sought a legal opinion confirmed the reality.

The truth of the matter

Letter to the Orillia Packet & Times from Allan Baker, Oro-Medonte

Mayor Harry Hughes took Ann Truyens to court over her claims against him in the comment section of the Orillia Packet & Times’ website in 2015.

The case began after the mayor recused himself from any discussions relating to a Burl’s Creek land bylaw due to his belief that he might have an indirect pecuniary interest over a relative’s seasonal job at the event grounds. Truyens, unhappy with the mayor’s actions, posted what Deputy Judge Brian Kinnear characterized as “somewhat intemperate” comments online.

After Hughes filed his claim, Truyens sought to have the action dismissed by invoking Ontario’s anti-SLAPP law, but Kinnear allowed the mayor’s suit to proceed, concluding that the defamation case had “substantial merit” and that Truyens did not have a “valid defence” to the defamatory comments. Hughes said he was satisfied with that Oct. 19, 2016, ruling and felt “vindicated” – cleared of suspicion and accusation. If that were true, why did he continue with his lawsuit for eight more months and then drop it the day before the start of the trial? Was it to avoid being cross-examined under oath?

Hughes’s two-year persistence with his lawsuit suggests that his intention was to silence Truyens and discourage others who have similar opinions regarding his actions related to Burl’s Creek from expressing those views.

Beyond Kinnear’s judgment as to the appropriateness of the anti-SLAPP law in this case, there is the issue of truth. Debate and transparency on matters of public interest, such as Burl’s Creek, is extremely important. Elected officials must be open to criticism and respond with honesty and candour, as is their responsibility. The Packet’s forum was a venue for such debate, but Hughes chose to take legal action rather than public discussion.

Hughes said, “I hope that all elected officials will breathe easier, because this is becoming rampant.” This is a view of the effect, not the cause! Dishonesty and the lack of transparency and accountability in governance is being opposed nation-wide.