NOTICE PURSUANT TO THE LIBEL AND

SLANDER ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c.L.12

B E T W E E N:

MIKE BULLARD

Plaintiff

- and –

AOL CANADA INC., and ANDREE LAU

Defendants

NOTICE OF LIBEL

TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to section 5(1) of the Libel and Slander, Act, R.S.O. 1990,
c.L.12 (the “Libel and Slander Act”) Mike Bullard complains of and objects to the false,
malicious, irresponsible and defamatory online magazine posting concerning him at
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/06/10/cynthia-mulligan-mike-bullard-victim-impact-
statement-harassment_a_23455297/ which was posted on June 10, 2018 and/or updated
on June 11, 2018, entitled ‘Cynthia Mulligan Victim Impact Statement Calls Out Mike
Bullard Harassment As Abuse’. A subline therein further read ‘"I am here today because
I refuse to be a victim," said the Toronto reporter’. The Defamatory publication and any
others of which Mike Bullard is currently unaware, are hereinafter collectively referred to
as the “Defamatory Words”.

The Defamatory words included the title and subline as well as:

“[the complainant] went to the Toronto police after receiving a flood of text
messages and anonymous phone calls from a pay phone.”

"And you were abusive in so many ways, driving by my work, endless texts and
phone calls, often while I was on air, despite the fact I clearly told you to stop," said
Mulligan, whose original victim impact statement was posted in its entirety by her
friend and fellow TV reporter Avery Haines on Facebook.”

1
 “"You abused your power as a radio host as well, threatening to talk about me on
your show if I didn't do as you ordered," Mulligan added.”

"No woman should ever have to go through this simply because she ended a
relationship."

“Police warned Bullard three times to stay away from Mulligan. The harassment
trickled down to an impact on Mulligan's daughters.”

“"Your irrational behaviour was escalating. I was scared," she said in her
statement.”

"The hardest part, other than the growing pervasive fear, was when I had to tell my
two daughters that police were concerned for our safety and we had to move out
of our house."

“She also noted that Bullard has not taken responsibility for his actions.”

“On Friday, Bullard told reporters that Mulligan's victim impact statement was "the
most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in my life," according to CBC News.”

“"I've never stalked or abused a woman in my life. I've never made an obscene
phone call in my life, and I never will," said Bullard, who received a conditional
sentence and six months probation. He must also attend a domestic violence
program.”

“His response underscored the message in Mulligan's statement.”

“"If anything, I hope people will listen to this and realize that if they turn a blind eye
they too are part of the problem and they are enablers. Women go through this far
too often — they need people to stand up and call out this destructive behaviour.
It is a crime.”

"I'm told a friend of his defended him by saying 'all he did was love her.' That wasn't
love. It was abuse."

The Defamatory words were further accompanied by further defamatory words /

screenshot and/or tweet and/or facebook post from the complainant about her friend,
having re-posted what purported to be the ‘victim impact statement’ read in court, without
any attached disclaimed or limitation, whatsoever. Rather, the screenshot provided a link
to an online facebook posting by the accuser in the criminal proceedings, and read:

2
 “My friend @avery_haines posted my victim impact statement after watching me
read it in court yesterday. Here it is in entirety. I’m lucky to have such amazing
friends and looking forward to now putting this behind me. Harassment is abuse
https://www.facebook.com/1113030342/posts/10215267000004286/ …”

At all material times you were aware that on or about September 21, 2016 a charge of
criminal harassment pursuant to section 264(2) of the Criminal Code (the so called
‘stalker’ legislation) alleged that the complainant feared “for her personal safety” as a
result of Mike Bullard’s actions. As you knew or ought to have known, that charge was
dismissed by the Court on June 1, 2018. The Court found that the complainant’s fears
were entirely subjective and not objective.

At all material times you were aware that on or about October 26, 2016 a second charge
alleged that Mr. Bullard had breached a court order by allegedly attending at the
complainant’s home. As you knew or ought to have known, that charge pursuant to
section 145 (5.1) of the Criminal Code was dismissed by the Court on June 1, 2018.

At all material times you were aware that on or about November 7, 2016 one charge of
failure to comply was elevated to obstructing justice pursuant to section 139(2) of the
Criminal Code, by indirectly attempting to have the complainant withdraw her complaint.
As you knew or ought to have known, that charge was dismissed by the Court on June 1,
2018.

At all material times you were aware that 2 new charges of failing to comply with previous
bail conditions was brought on or about May 16, 2018. These were (1) on or about
October 16, 2016 Mike Bullard breached section 145(5.1) of the Criminal Code by
communicating indirectly with his complainant; and (2) that between October 26, 2016
and June 23, 2017, Mike Bullard breached section 145(3) of the Criminal Code by failing
without lawful excuse to reside with his surety. As you are aware, Mike Bullard pled guilty
to these charges on June 8, 2018.

At all material times you knew with respect to (1) that Mr. Bullard contacted a mutual
friend of his and the complainant, and relayed the message that he has heard that the
charge can drop if the complainant wished so. That third party forwarded text messages
to the complainant that had been sent to her by Mr. Bullard. Those texts provided a phone
number to a Detective and indicated that she had said that if the complainant called of
her own volition, and withdrew the complaint, the charge would be withdrawn. The
complainant instead contacted the police to report this incident.

At all material times you knew with respect to (2) that Mike Bullard advised the Court that
his lapse was inadvertent, and in part caused by a medical emergency and death of his
mother.

3
At all material times you were aware that Mike Bullard pled guilty to making harassing
telecommunications to the complainant between June 13, 2016 and September 21, 2016
contrary to section 372(4) of the Criminal Code. As you know these communications
were benign in nature and did not concern the complainant’s fear for safety.

At all material times you knew or ought to have known, that Mike Bullard was granted a
conditional discharge with 6 month probation; a term that he take the PARS program;
have no contact with the complainant; and keep the peace and be of good behavior.

At all material times you knew that Mike Bullard was not contacted to comment on any of
the Defamatory Words. You also knew that you did not balance the Defamatory Words
by reference to court transcripts or any independent research or background checks, such
that the Defamatory Words were never intended to provide proper context but were meant
to distort, and mislead the public.

As you knew or ought to have known, in making its findings on June 1, 2018, amongst
other things, the Court stated:

While Bullard’s conduct as alleged could be seen as harassing in that sense, just
referred to, in my view there is no reasonable basis for the fear for Ms. Mulligan’s
safety. Parliament has chosen to differentiate between harassing communications
on the one hand and conduct which gives rise to a reasonable fear for one’s safety.
There was nothing in any of the communications which gives rise to a reasonable
inference that her safety was being threatened. While the communications could
be seen as persistent, unwanted, bothersome, conduct for which he will be
committed to trial, nothing in his past behaviour toward her nor these
communications allude to directly or circumstantially, explicitly or implicitly to any
threat to her safety. At most there was an aggressive email to Tumelty, but the
alleged threat to Tumelty, if that’s what it was, was not what this case was about.
It was never even argued. His conduct in my view is properly covered by the
harassing communications count. He’ll be discharged of the criminal harassment
count.

To conclude, he will be committed on the failing to comply for the October 13th text
to Ms. Seatle. The Crown seeks committal on the call and the texts of October
16th when he was going to the hospital. He will be committed on that. He will be
committed on one count of harassing communications.
None of the communications threatened the complainant. They were unwanted, to
be sure. They were harassing and they amounted to breaches of the undertaking.
I cannot imagine reasonable, responsible counsel being unable to resolve this
case in a way that is consistent with the interests of Mulligan, Bullard and the public
interest. In this era where trials of very serious injuries are stayed for delay, it is

4
 perplexing that this has taken up four days for a preliminary inquiry and will now
proceed to a jury trial. This is not a case, in my view, that should proceed to a jury
trial. I hope counsel seriously reflect on those comments. With that I am happy to
sign the committal.
As you know or ought to have known, the complainant’s “victim statement” that was
posted online, was different from the one she read in Court. The one she read in Court
was redacted by the judge to delete unproven allegations, amongst other things. In
particular you knew or ought to have known that the Court struck:

“Your abuse”

“And you left me voicemail messages, horking and spitting at me”

“Even after your arrest your harassment didn’t stop. It continued on Twitter, with
veiled threats, comments and denials. And then a private investigator showed up
at my house on a Sunday morning four months ago and tried to bully and
intimidate. He also went to my former husband’s home and called a colleague,
saying if I didn’t drop the charges he would release dirt on me and destroy my
career. There is no dirt and you know it. Fortunately there is a recording. That PI
is now facing charges as well.”

“I was told that 80 percent of women give up after 6 or 8 months because they
can’t take the pressure as time goes on and there is no end in sight. That’s not
justice. That’s an overburdened system.”

“What is troubling is you have never taken responsibility for your actions. You think
in a twisted way you were justified. You weren’t. You are alone responsible for
being here in this courtroom. I hope you get help. You need it. Go to therapy and
when you are done, get more therapy and then get some more.”

“But I will always wonder who around Mr. Bullard stood up to tell him what he was
doing was wrong. Who spoke out? And how many were passive witnesses? I’m
told a friend of his said “all he did was love her.” That wasn’t love. It was abuse.
There is still such a long way to go.”

You also knew or ought to have known of Mike Bullard’s on record position at Court on
June 8, 2018 that he disagreed with the bulk of the complainant’s victim statement that
was read in Court.

At all material times you also knew or ought to have known that there was an agreement
on sentencing, and that the complainant had represented herself publicly and in her
unredacted personal posting she claimed was her Victim Impact Statement, that she

5
claimed to be someone who was not part of an alleged 80% of women she said simply
gave up legal proceedings because they couldn’t take the pressure.
And despite being aware of all of the aforementioned things, you went ahead with the
publication of the Defamatory Words. The Defamatory Words were published with
express malice, the defendants intending or knowing, that the Defamatory Words and the
innuendo arising from them were false and defamatory or with careless and reckless
disregard for the truth and their publication was calculated by the defendants to disparage
and injure the reputation of Mike Bullard personally and in the way of his profession, trade
and calling.
Further, the defendants published the Defamatory Words intending or knowing, that the
Defamatory Words would be republished or rebroadcast, in whole or in part, by others
and accordingly the defendants are jointly and severally liable for all such republication
or rebroadcast.

Mike Bullard intends to rely on the entirety of the Defamatory Words including all
accompanying headlines, texts and/or images, in support of his intended action, and all
earlier and subsequent versions of the Defamatory Words published or republished, in
any form whatsoever, in whole or in part, by the defendants and/or others.
The Defamatory Words in their natural and ordinary meaning and/or by inference or
innuendo, are false, malicious and defamatory of Mike Bullard, have subjected him to
humiliating personal attacks, hatred and contempt and have caused and will continue to
cause damage to his reputation personally and in the way of his profession, trade and
calling.

Mike Bullard states that the Defamatory Words in their natural and ordinary meaning, and
by innuendo, falsely and maliciously meant and were understood to mean that:

a) he was guilty of criminal stalking despite the charge having been dismissed by the
Court;
b) the allegations against him, as described by his complainant, are true, despite
being dismissed by the Court;
c) by virtue of the above, he is unfit for employment and/or intimate relationships.

The full extent of the damages suffered by Mike Bullard is unknown.

To mitigate his damages, Mike Bullard requires that you immediately publish in print in
online at https://www.huffingtonpost.ca an apology and retraction, in a form first approved
by Mike Bullard, in respect of the Defamatory Words, in a manner at least as prominent
as the original publication of the Defamatory Words, and that you immediately remove
the Defamatory Words from the https://www.huffingtonpost.ca website and take all steps
necessary to ensure that no archived versions remain on the internet, in whole or in part.

6
Please be advised that you are named in this Notice of Libel in that you caused,
participated in, authorized, permitted or condoned the publication of the Defamatory
Words and are, as a result, jointly and severally liable for the damages flowing therefrom.

It is hereby demanded that you retain in safekeeping all drafts of the Defamatory Words,
all notes and tapes of all interviews and all other notes, documents, computer documents,
tapes, emails, any other materials, documents and records relevant to the Defamatory
Words, and all comments or reaction, in any form, received by the defendants in respect
to the publication of the Defamatory Words.

Mike Bullard intends to commence an action against you in respect of the Defamatory
Words and reserves all rights in this regard. He hereby gives notice pursuant to the
Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.C.43 that he will be claiming pre-judgment interest
from the date of this Notice to the date of judgment.

July 11, 2018 ZUBER & COMPANY LLP

Litigation Counsel
100 Simcoe Street
Suite 500
Toronto, ON
M5H 3G2

Joshua J. A. Henderson (56389K)

Tel: (416) 362-5005

Fax: (416) 362-5289

Lawyers for Mike Bullard

TO: AOL Canada Inc.

99 Spadina Avenue, Suite 200
Toronto ON M5V3P8

AND TO: Andree Lau

99 Spadina Avenue, Suite 200
Toronto ON M5V3P8