Login / RegisterJohn Furlong's family issues statement in his defence
Editor's note: John Furlong's family issued today (January 23) a statement in response to allegations contained in a statement of defence filed in court by journalist Laura Robinson. Robinson is one of the parties being sued by Furlong over an article published by the Georgia Straight in September 2012. There's a separate claim of defamation against her in connection with an email sent to Own the Podium in November. What follows is the Furlong family's statement.
During the Olympic excitement three years ago, when John Furlong was finishing a decade of service to this country, we would never have imagined this day, stepping forward to defend our father. We, Maria, Johnnie, Damien, Emma, Molly, our mother Margaret, our step-mother Gail and our children -- 11 of them -- feel compelled to make a public statement. Serious, unsubstantiated allegations regarding abuse inside our family have been published. These shocking allegations are without merit and portray a character whom none of us recognizes. We are being subjected to shame and embarrassment by misuse of journalistic privilege and license. Imagine trying to explain to your nine year old child that an adult in a position of power has written that Grandpa is a racist, a wife-beater and a rapist because of what appears to be personal enmity. This is not objective journalism, but self-serving, sensationalistic misuse of the media. Obscene accusations and innuendo have now been printed nation-wide and nothing could possibly undo that. The public should be deeply concerned at the power of a single journalist whose words can smash into a family like a wrecking-ball.
We politely ask that you respect our privacy as this will be our only statement.
The Furlong Family
They claim that the allegations are "without merit". They allege "misuse of journalistic privilege" and "personal enmity" They accuse the original author of "self-serving, sensationlistic misuse of the media" and of "obscene accusations and innuendo".
Unfortunately, until this matter has gone to court - and until the police investigation is finished - the family's "rant" has no value. In fact, it may well come back to haunt them if John Furlong's lawsuit is unsuccessful.
You can't beat name-calling with retaliatory name-calling, folks ... and you certainly can't demand privacy when you make a very public statement.
My advice is that you keep quiet and let the legal system run its course.
Witch hunts (see the Star and its single-minded ongoing vendetta against Mayor Rob Ford), incitement (see CBC fan the flames of INM), slander bordering on libellous, outing, public castigation, unfortunately have become acceptable, and these attention, ratings seeking chuckleheads are not being held accountable.
PS: I live out west and I am not a Rob Ford fan.
"Scurrilous atatments", "unprincipled reporters", "witch hunts", "vendetta", "incitement", "slander bordering on libellous", "outing", "public castigation"
One can only wonder why an internet hero like you shouldn't be sued. Got some liability insurance, hero?
I do not know what the truth is in this case. Allegations were made in the original news reports. Further allegations are made in court documents. Denials have been made in public and in court documents. None of it has been tested in court, through examination and cross-examination. The family members purportedly making this statement today are not part of that proceeding.
I wonder why Mr. Furlong is fighting this out in public beforehand. The downside is that it allows the purportedly defamatory accusations to be rebroadcast over and over again in the form of legal reporting.
Is he hoping the defendants (particularly Ms. Robinson) will make further public statements that are defamatory, to strengthen his case in court? On the other hand, the back accusations against Ms. Robinson may strengthen her counterclaim. It is clever that it is done through non-parties to the court proceeding. The end result depends what is proven in court.
Defamation in Canada now includes a defence of responsible communication, which protects against false statements as long as the writer was diligent, in all the circumstances, in verifying the allegedly defamatory comments.
Winning public sympathy won't win the court case. At present, I would not be surprised if this case turned out like the Dering v. Uris defamation suit, which Leon Uris turned into fiction in his novel QB VII. Dr. Deering proved defamation, yet won only damages of a half penny. He hadn't performed 17,000 surgeries without anesthetic at Auschwitz that he was accused of, but had participated in unnecessary sterilizations and other operations.
It remains to be seen what will happen in this case.
Furlong had a great gravy train job, this is just payback entertainment for the taxpayers.
Here's to you Miss Robinson
Just as there are those who will automatically assume the highly placed white guy is guilty of abusing his power, there are also those who will automatically assume that the Aboriginal people who cry foul are guilty of exploiting the system. Anyone who thinks that Furlong's is the only reputation on the line likely hasn't ever had the experience of speaking up and getting involved in a public dispute.
I've had that experience, and it was because I thought I needed to do the right thing. There was nothing in it for me except the feeling that I'd followed my conscience. I was exposed to ridicule, frozen out at my workplace, denounced by former friends and suffered losses to my professional status and opportunities. All because I had the nerve to speak my truth.
Thank you, 2010 Olympics and your affiliated corporate bodies for the following:
Thank you for blaring those nuclear-strength lasers into the sky, without any warning, on one of those rare clear nights when even I was able to locate the Pleiades with my naked eyes whilst standing right at the edge of the sea. Thank you for drowning out the stars and ruining a minor epiphany, something which the Caligulas and Neros of old were incapable of doing. In the near future, oligarchs will beam high-powered slogans into the night sky on a regular basis, a horror Orwell never imagined.
Thank you for installing all of those surveillance cameras throughout the city and leaving them here. Never again can one just simply loiter under an awning for more than 2 minutes during a heavy rainfall humming a little ditty to oneself without being hassled by an embittered security guard. Suspicious behaviour. Mon Dieu!
Thank you for the security blockades which were set up everywhere, especially near the public library. Thank you to the mob which collectively tittered and hissed as you saw me approaching while I was carrying a stack of overdue library books. Books! Thanks for moving in upon me and thank you to the cop for escorting me through until I found the courage to clear my own path through that gauntlet of morons.
Such things can break one’s precious little heart and even worse, divert one’s mind to thoughts awfully grave. Why go to that dark place? The most practical solution, I’d say, is to defiantly cultivate a sense of humour about the absurdities inherent in fascism. Like that merry prankster who had the Promethean audacity to “steal” some light from the Olympian flame in Gastown. His time here was so fleeting but it was a life well lived, wasn’t it?