MICHAEL TUTTON

HALIFAX - The Halifax fire department's two top officials have filed a defamation lawsuit against seven people, including two firefighters, over comments that were made anonymously on a local weekly newspaper's website.

Fire Chief Bill Mosher and Deputy Chief Stephen Thurber say in court documents filed Thursday in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia that the comments made on the website of The Coast are libellous and they are seeking unspecified damages.

The comments came after a series of articles about the fire department, including an article about black firefighters filing a human rights complaint against the department.

There are no allegations of libel against The Coast itself, and the newspaper is not named in the lawsuit.

The court documents say two of the defendants are current employees of the department and two are former employees. The backgrounds of three other people are not given.

The statement of claim contains allegations that have not been proven in court. No statements of defence have been filed.

The fire chief and deputy chief went through two court proceedings in an effort to obtain the names of people who wrote the online comments in March of this year and in April 2009.

"The plaintiffs say that the comments posted on the website by the defendants using the user names ... included defamatory statements which have caused damage to their professional and business reputations and to their standing in the community," the lawsuit alleges.

The comments criticize the chief and deputy for their leadership abilities, suggest they were unprofessional in handling personnel and claim they should be removed from their jobs.

Blair Cromwell, a black firefighter who has launched a human rights complaint against the fire department, confirmed in a telephone interview that he had sent one of the emails contained in the lawsuit.

The email he sent included a derogatory description of the deputy fire chief and alleges unfair treatment of black members of the department who were recruited through affirmative action programs.

The firefighter said he hadn't been approached to see if he would apologize for his comments and he intends to respond publicly to the allegations after he's read the document.

"I don't think I owe anyone an apology. ... If my name is going to be named in a lawsuit, I'm going to be holding a news conference," he said from Florida.

"There's a long history of stuff here."

Cromwell argued that the lawsuit could be aimed at silencing his persistent criticisms of the department.

"This has everything to do with a strategic lawsuit. It's a strategic lawsuit aimed at preventing public participation. They want to shut people up. That's my feeling," he said.

The other firefighter named in the lawsuit is identified as an investigator employed in the fire prevention division. He could not be reached for comment.

Donald Snider, a former fire captain who retired 13 years ago, is named in the lawsuit and confirmed he had made the online comment attributed to him in the lawsuit.

He said he's not sure yet what actions he will take.

Another former firefighter could not be reached for comment and a Halifax-area woman named in the lawsuit also couldn't be reached.

Armando and Betty Raymond of Bear River, N.S., are named in the lawsuit. But when reached on the telephone, Betty Raymond said she never wrote any emails about the fire chiefs and she said her husband died five years ago.

The human rights complaint filed by Cromwell and a group of other black firefighters in June 2008 alleges that the Halifax Regional Fire and Emergency Service discriminated against its black employees for years.

Documents filed with the commission allege specific examples of racism that firefighters faced on the job, including the publication in January 2006 of a newsletter that contained comments about the recruiting of black and female firefighters.

The human rights complaint also says there was a plan to keep firefighters from minority groups at urban core stations where they would be more visible to the public, but they did not in fact obtain these positions.

The documents say that on another occasion in 2005, a poster about handwashing in the restroom at a fire station in Middle Sackville was defaced with a racial slur.

A spokesman for the fire department said the complaint hasn't been resolved yet.

Mosher has said that many of the allegations in the human rights case don't accurately represent what has happened in the department in its efforts to eliminate racism.

Mosher and Thurber weren't available for comment on Thursday. A city spokeswoman also declined comment.

Paul Meldrum, a spokesman for the fire department, said he's not aware of any disciplinary measures being taken against the two firefighters named in the lawsuit.

"I don't expect we'll have information for the public regarding our personnel," he said.

He said allegations of racism in the fire department shouldn't be confused with the lawsuit or be taken as an indicator that there is a racism issue.

"Some of our firefighters voiced concerns about treatment of some members in the fire department," he said. "Our chief took prompt and immediate action, investigated the complaints and implemented corrective measures."

Meldrum said the lawsuit is a "separate matter (from the human rights case) ... they're not directly related."

Related
Chief Reason: Social Media's Unintended Consequences


Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Views: 119

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Buckle up, kiddies.
You are going to see more and more of this.

The preservation of unhindered anonymous free speech is essential for a just and open world, it stands to reason that, protected whistle blowers are a grand checking and balancing institution. I am sorry to say that, this excellent entitlement is open to abuse. The public's value through freedom of expression is clearly reasonable, particularly in a case necessitating clear public notice such as thugs and abusers and other unsavory characters. This cost should not be borne by an spotless person or entity, examples such as this are an undeniable example of unlawful expression & may be open to civil and equitable remedies in court, & in quite a few jurisdictions, including 17 US states, criminal convictions.

However, there are many antisocial fools who manipulate this liberty for malicious purposes. They take joy in tormenting others; they are essentially driven by the suffering of others; a victim's torment drives them. Everyday individuals such as 90-97% of those reading this column are unable begin to envisage what drives these individuals.

This lamentable public dilemma has taken on wildfire proportions during the preceding ten years through anonymous internet defamation. There have been internet libel law suits where authorities have issued orders directing that anonymous and awful bloggers are to be uncloaked by subpoena, such orders are normally a cause of outrage for a small yet noisy breed of zealous proponents that suggest that free speech must be unconditional and a talker or author is not to be stood responsible for his/her utterances, irrespective as to truth or falsity of the statements. Some assume that should these protesting people could experience the debilitating consequences that a relentless internet enabled sociopath has on the emotional, physical, vocational, and social well-being of targets and their family; they wouldn't be as vocal in their opposition.

An inherent aspect of anonymous blogging is that it is not as believable if seriously assessed by sensible and open-minded third parties. Notwithstanding, there is a newfangled dynamic with the conundrum of vicious & anonymous bloggers. Whilst these statements could lack credibility, if the target is to be assessed for employment, consulting awards, Girl Guide leadership or a date, the individual conducting the background check will probably consider the potential PR hazards from engaging the target. While the potential employer can probably see past the denunciation, the decision maker needs to give weight to what their customers and partners will ponder if less clever or open-minded.

To many people give up thier lives for me not to be able to speak my mind. But I was also taught that if you that serious about it take credit for it. I've signed my name to everything I've ever written...good or bad. I've had people in my firehouse want to suspend for things I've written online. But each time they have never been able to rpove I wrote anything that was untrue. And thats the key. If wrote Chief soandso was secretly Gay, I better have pictures of him doing somethng gay. If I say he acts gat then I'm okay. ( I have nothing against homosexuals, I consider myself a lesbian...I love women....)

While people have the right to say almost anything (can't yell fire in a crowded theatre) I hate when people hide behind screen names to do it.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Find Members Fast


Or Name, Dept, Keyword
Invite Your Friends
Not a Member? Join Now

Firefighting Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2025   Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.   Powered by

Badges  |  Contact Firefighter Nation  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service