Water well defender to pay $25K

2
754

0810Jakubecwell

Wallaceburg Coun. Jeff Wesley went head with his defamation complaint against Water Wells First spokesperson Kevin Jakubec, getting a judgment of $25,000, plus $2,000 in fixed costs against him, and has said he will not run again for council.

Wesley’s lawyer, Michael Lerner, released a copy of the judgment to the media from Small Claims Court, regarding his defamation claim over the Shame Award given to the Wallaceburg councillor back in February and Jakubec’s unwillingness to apologize in the media and retract his statements that Wesley “misled the public.”

Jakubec, as spokesperson for WWF, had already given a Shame Award to Mayor Randy Hope to draw attention to the group’s concern with the municipality’s lack of action over water well issues in Dover since the wind turbine projects began. Wesley was the second member of council to receive the award in the form of a Pinocchio statue.

In Wesley’s defamation claim, which was originally for $30,000 but exceeded the limit for Small Claims Court claims, Lerner said Jakubec’s press release published in local media contained “a number of defamatory statements that were calculated to cause damage to the Plaintiff’s reputation” and the words were meant to “call into question the Plaintiff’s honesty and personal integrity.”

Lerner went on to say the comments used by Jakubec went beyond “fair comment,” damaging Wesley’s “credit, character and reputation” as a citizen, lawyer and councillor.

While Jakubec did apologize for any offense to him or his family in an e-mail to Wesley, he refused to publically apologize or retract his statements to the media.

In the decision from Deputy Judge Glenn C. Walker, he noted that Wesley said he was “embarrassed and humiliated” by the statements Jakubec made and he “regrets that these statements will be the defining moment at the end of his career. Because of these statements, he has decided not to run in the next municipal election.”

Due to the fact no public apology or retraction was made, which Walker said had Jakubec done so, he “may have avoided this litigation. However, he chose not to take advantage of this offer, nor did he take advantage of his opportunity to defend this action.”

The court decision said a court officer attempted to serve Jakubec three times with the court claim but he was not home to receive the documents, and then later he acknowledged by e-mail a notice from Lerner, which the court allowed as notice. Jakubec, however, said he was not notified and had no idea the court claim was going ahead.

“I had no idea Coun. Wesley set a court date. I was not informed of a court date and Michael Lerner just contacted me today (Monday) through e-mail about the judgment after he had already issued a press statement last week,” Jakubec said in an e-mail to The Voice. “I was completely blindsided. I didn’t think Coun. Wesley would go through with this as he wished me and my family a Happy Easter and I the same to him. Total blindside that a councillor would do this after I apologized.

“Coun. Wesley and I should be working together more than ever to stop this destruction of our aquifer.”

Jakubec said he e-mailed Lerner.

“I will appeal and he’ll be contacted by my lawyer.”

Wesley was not available for comment but his lawyer made a statement on his behalf.

“Mr. Wesley is delighted with the decision and has instructed me to enforce the judgment for damages and costs,” Lerner said in a statement to the media. “After all expenses have been paid, the balance will be donated to a charity or non-profit organization committed to the preservation of clean drinking water.”

2 COMMENTS

  1. In my decades of observation
    When members of the public are pushed into a corner
    Those holding public office
    Are open to name calling as a very real part of the job
    Maybe time spent helping fix the problem
    Would have been a wise choice
    The guiding principal for Holding public office is to Help

  2. I agree, since when is it not the right to call into question the actions or inactions of a politician. As long as name calling is not the method of choice there should be nothing wrong with calling a spade …a spade. This court action seems to me to be an infringement on free speech meant to dissaud people from standing up for their right. In this case, the right to clean water

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here