Friction arose between the two after the plaintiff had what he described as ‘consensual sexual relations with… a guest staying at the defendant’s home’
A judge has ordered a New Brunswick man to pay his neighbour $55,000 in damages for falsely accusing him of rape.
Recommended Videos
Stephen Craig Melanson successfully sued Bradley Angus Sellars for defamation in the Court of King’s Bench.
Sellars “engaged in a persistent and malicious pattern of misconduct by publicly accusing (Melanson) of serious criminal offences without concrete evidence to support these claims,” Justice Christa Bourque said in a recent summary judgment awarding Melanson $30,000 in general damages and $25,000 in aggravated and punitive damages.
“This malicious intent is evident in (Sellars’) repeated actions, including posting defamatory statements on Facebook, shouting accusations in the neighbourhood, and spray-painting defamatory remarks on a public street.”
Even more troubling, the Moncton judge said in her Dec. 12 decision, was that Sellars “directed these baseless allegations at individuals entering” Melanson’s home, “including young women visiting for prom dress alterations, making accusations that (Melanson) was secretly recording people while undressing. Such egregious and high-handed behaviour not only caused harm to the plaintiff’s reputation but also offends the court’s sense of decency.”
Sellars and Melanson live across the street from one another. Friction arose between them after Melanson had what he described as “consensual sexual relations with Jessica Knight, a guest staying at the defendant’s home,” said the judge’s decision, which notes Melanson was unaware at the time that Knight was in a relationship with Sellars.
After the encounter, Melanson “confessed the matter to his common-law spouse, Dawn Ann Killam,” said the decision.
Sellars learned about the tryst and Knight moved out of his home about two months later.
“Sometime later, during the fall of 2021, the defendant allegedly came to the plaintiff’s home and began shouting that he was a ‘f–king rapist’ and threatened to kill him,” said the decision.
On several occasions, Melanson said Sellars “shouted similar accusations from his garage” that were overheard and corroborated by neighbours.
If the alleged statements are untrue, the answer to whether they are defamatory is unequivocally yes
The judge’s decision points to a post on a Facebook page dubbed Prom Pretty, “which provides formal dresses to high school students in financial need,” where one of their neighbours thanked Dawn Killam, Melanson’s spouse, who operates a tailoring and seamstress business from their home.
An April 11, 2023, response from a Facebook user calling themselves “Woodsman Brad” accused Melanson of raping his 20-year-old girlfriend.
“Girls that get dresses at this business, be aware of the male predator in the house.”
Melanson “asserts that he was never contacted by law enforcement regarding any allegations of sexual assault made by either Jessica Knight or” Sellars, said the decision.
Two days later, Melanson and Killam “witnessed the defendant spray-painting a message on the street in front of his driveway.”
The incident was captured on Melanson’s security camera. “The painted message read: ‘Pervert Rapes Women Stay Away,’” said the decision. “Two arrows were pointing toward the plaintiff’s home.”
Some of Killam’s customers “were subjected to verbal harassment by” Sellars, said the decision.
“Additionally, the record includes evidence that the defendant handed a note directly to one of Ms. Killam’s customers during a visit to the home. The handwritten note included in the record reads: ‘I feel bad knowing that they are taping your daughter with no clothes on. That’s terrible.’”
Melanson and Killam “categorically deny what is implied in the note,” said the decision.
Sellars denied “making the alleged defamatory statements and denies having a Facebook account named ‘Woodsman Brad,’” said the decision.
The judge had “no difficulty concluding” that the statements from Sellars were defamatory.
“In my view, a reasonable person of ordinary intelligence, interpreting the words in their plain and ordinary meaning, would find that they tend to diminish (Melanson’s) reputation,” Bourque said.
The judge could find “nothing in the surrounding circumstances that mitigates or attenuates the defamatory nature” of Sellars’ comments.
“Sexual assault is a serious and violent criminal offence,” Bourque said. “To falsely claim the plaintiff has committed such crimes, as well as recording young women changing their clothes, would undoubtedly have a devastating impact on his reputation. If the alleged statements are untrue, the answer to whether they are defamatory is unequivocally yes.”
Sellars denied “directing any defamatory statements” at Melanson, said the judge, “instead claiming that he occasionally shouts and curses at rodents and vermin that enter his garage. To support this explanation, he submitted a photograph of a dead mouse, which he appears to believe the court would readily accept as evidence. I find this explanation to be wholly implausible and dismiss it as a rather ridiculous assumption on the defendant’s part. Such an attempt to justify his actions is not only unconvincing but also lacks any reasonable basis especially since a neighbour testified that they had repeatedly heard the defendant shouting toward the plaintiff, calling him a ‘f–king rapist’ on at least two separate occasions.”
The judge was “satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that each of the defamatory statements complained of by (Melanson) was directed at him.”
She had no “hesitation in concluding that the defamatory statements shouted at” Melanson outside his home came from Sellars. “Similarly, it is clear to me that the spray-painted messages were also created by the defendant.”
While it was less clear who authored the offensive social media post, “a comprehensive review of the evidence supports, on a balance of probabilities, that he was responsible,” said the judge.
While Sellars “denies making the alleged defamatory statements, he asserts in his statement of defence that, if he did make them, they are true and he relies on the defence of justification,” Bourque said.
But the judge didn’t buy that. “Based on the totality of the evidence, there is no truth, substantial or otherwise, in the claim that the plaintiff is a rapist. Therefore, the defence of justification fails.”
The judge noted the “defamatory Facebook post was published on an account with at least 900 combined followers and likes. While the post was deleted relatively quickly, it had already been shared at least four times by other Facebook users. This makes it virtually impossible to determine the full extent of its dissemination, particularly given the viral nature of social media.”
On top of damages, the judge ordered Sellars to pay Melanson $5,000 in court costs.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.