The Supreme Court rejected Jasmin Roy’s plea to remain anonymous in a defamation case. The actor has actually taken legal action against a man who is said to be behind his name appearing on the list of alleged abusers on the Say his name page in May 2021.
Court documents reveal that Mr Roy took several steps to have a publication by Jean-François Robillard retracted, which he considers defamatory.
His testimony would have prompted the site Say His Name to include the name of Jasmin Roy in its list of alleged abusers.
A formal notice was quickly sent to Mr. Robillard as well as to the administrators of the Say His Name page, Delphine Bergeron and AA
This procedure at the time led to Jasmin Roy’s name being removed from the Say His Name list.
But in May 2021, Mr Robillard published a new message in which he not only repeated the allegations but also revealed the formal notice that had been sent to him, describing it as an “attempt to intimidate”.
“You asked me to remove your name from the list of aggressors, the payment of $150,000 in damages, and not to discuss the subject of the aggression you committed against me, or I would expose myself to civil lawsuits if I did not cooperate with your requirements”, says the publication, which has also since been withdrawn.
Mr. Robillard admitted to deleting his first publication in August 2020, but realizing the “irony” of the situation. “You are the head of a foundation against bullying Jasmin, you must set an example, not become a bully yourself. »
He also said that he had filed a complaint with the police, but that it was not accepted. “Unfortunately for me and fortunately for you…in cases of sexual assault or wrongdoing, there are few or no witnesses. So in the absence of your statement […] it limits the work of the police… and due to lack of evidence, the police cannot proceed with the case, which will be closed for now,” he wrote.
Mr. Robillard asserts “the right to speak, the right to tell [son] history without gag, without coercion”.
The release is again mediated by Say his name, which puts the artist’s name back on the list.
Another formal notice was sent to them, but this time Mr. Robillard refused to comply.
On 4 June 2021, Jasmin Roy’s lawyer, Me Jocelyn Vézina has filed a request for the artist to remain anonymous in case he files a defamation case against Mr. Robillard. Before Judge Sylvain Lussier of the Superior Court of Quebec, he pleaded that by revealing himself, Mr. Roy and his foundation would see their image suffer.
“Furthermore, it is highly likely that third parties and business partners from [Jasmin Roy et de la Fondation Jasmin Roy]by the natural association with which it is possible to make [M. Robillard et Dis son nom] will be reluctant to continue their cooperation with it if the defamatory remarks regarding [Jasmin Roy] is published and disseminated in connection with the legalization of this file,” we can read in the legal documents.
The lawyer also pleaded that the survival of the Jasmin Roy Foundation could be compromised. “The existence and survival of [Fondation Jasmin Roy] is only possible thanks to the contributions of third parties and business partners of the latter. Publication and dissemination of legal proceedings will seriously risk leading to the cessation of activities [la Fondation Jasmin Roy] “.
Me Vézina also claimed that his client was caught in a “trap” when Mr. Robillard stated in his last publication “Know that if you sue me, your case will become public. »
The public nature of the debates
In a decision handed down in mid-June 2021, Judge Lussier recalled that starting a trial is accompanied by a lot of inconvenience for any complainant. “There is a risk that the case will attract more media than the original event,” he notes. “Bringing defamation proceedings is part of the right to a full and complete defense: the injured party can have his honor and reputation restored. “.
A media consortium incl The duty had also disputed the artist’s request for anonymity.
On 22 September 2022, the Court of Appeal rejected Mr Roy’s motion, who then approached the Supreme Court. The latter, in turn, rejected his request for anonymity in a ruling handed down on Thursday. “The public nature of the debates is a fundamental principle of our legal system,” the appeals court judges in the case recalled, citing the Sherman decision on which their ruling was based.
To see in video
