Volume 4, Issue No. 45
OPINION/COMMENTARY
/ News That Fears None, Views That Favor Nobody /
Our latest as of Friday, February 10, 2023
~ The years have not deterred these two women from lunging at each other's throats. This week, business executive Liwayway Miranda has sought to stop Balita publisher Teresita "Tess" Cusipag and punish her for allegedly defaming her in print and social media by filing a libel suit in the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario. A "statement of claim" was served on Ms. Cusipag and received by her son in the paper's home office in Markham, Ontario.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LIWAYWAY MIRANDA v. TERESITA CUSIPAG
New Libel Suit Filed Against Balita
They've Been at Each Other's Throats Since 2020
By ROMEO P. MARQUEZ
Editor, The Filipino Web Channel
"No one assails me with impunity". - Edgar Allan Poe
TORONTO - A simmering dispute dating back to 2020 between two women has culminated this week with the filing of a libel suit against a community tabloid and its publisher/editor.
Business executive Liwayway Miranda aka Lily Miranda Hammer brought legal action against Teresita "Tess" Cusipag and Balita, the publication she owns, publishes, and edits, and is circulated in the Greater Toronto Area.
Lawyers for Ms. Miranda said a "statement of claim" has been served electronically and on Ms. Cusipag at her home office in Markham, Ontario on Wednesday, February 8, and received personally by her son Edward de Juan.
The lawyers said statements made by Ms. Cusipag and published in February 2020 and lately in December 2022, "constitute defamation of the plaintiff (Ms. Miranda) and are in the nature of libel and slander, damaging the plaintiff’s reputation."
In the "initial defamatory publications", the lawyers explained, "Balita and Ms. Cusipag published articles and public statements, falsely accusing—expressly and by implication—Ms. Miranda of fraud, scams, swindling, racketeering, 'faked investing', being a 'Scammer', credit card theft, forgery, blackmail, threats, providing licensed services without license, etc".
On December 11, 2019, which was months before Ms. Cusipag's February 2020 outburst, the Superior Court of Justice threw out charges of human trafficking and misrepresentation brought by Crown prosecutors against Ms. Miranda for lack of evidence. (Video and full story at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QprwiFQiLjs).
That basically exonerated Ms. Miranda from any wrongdoing, a decision that was quite an embarrassing development seen as a slap on the face of prosecutors who relied mainly on what appeared to be false accusations of six workers who had escaped from their work contracts. (Full story at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2019/12/cabal-of-mushroom-pickers-exposed-in.html).
Despite the court's dismissal of the charges which was widely reported in both mainstream and local media outlets, Ms. Cusipag persisted in her attacks on Ms. Miranda.
"The defendants (Ms. Cusipag and Balita) nevertheless continued maintaining the Initial Defamatory Publications even after being served with a notice of an intended action for libel" in August 2020, the lawyers said.
The latest was in the December 16-31, 2022 issue of Balita where she wrote that Ms. Hammer is a "notorious alleged scammer who up to this time is still hunted by victims to serve court documents".
Ms. Cusipag also implicated a paralegal named Jun Saludares who she called "soon to be a practicing lawyer" and quoted him as purportedly saying that Ms. Hammer is "the summa cum laude of scammers in Toronto". (Background story of Saludares at: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onlst/doc/2019/2019onlsth12/2019onlsth12.html).
Calling Saludares a "soon to be a practicing lawyer" indisputably showed the period when the article was written. In fact the moment I saw it online, I knew it was the same old, recycled piece that bordered on gossip.
"Ms. Cusipag further repeated and circulated the Initial Defamatory Publications through direct emails and messages to community members and through her personal social media presence and others equally affiliated with Balita," the lawyers explained.
Late last month, Ms. Cusipag said she would fight the lawsuit and hire "not just lawyers anymore" but "good ones instead" ostensibly alluding to her loss in two defamation lawsuits that cost her and Balita nearly one million dollars in damages. (Related story at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2022/01/good-lawyering-won-libel-cases.html).
(Disclosure: this reporter was also a defendant in the two cases).
According to Ms. Miranda's lawyers, "Ms. Cusipag and Balita have shown a consistent practice of publishing false allegations of fraud against reputable individuals, where the court found Ms. Cusipag was “on a malicious quest to destroy [those parties’] reputation”.
"In those actions," the lawyers said, "the court repeatedly found the defendants liable for defamation and slander. The court awarded damages, punitive damages, and substantial indemnity costs against the defendants for similar conduct". (Related story at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2021/01/).
Superior Court Justice Frederick L. Myers had found Ms. Cusipag guilty of criminal contempt and sentenced her to imprisonment of 21 days in a women's facility. She served 13 days and was released. (Video of Justice Myers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbXjhWyG9aE
Ms. Miranda is asking the Superior Court of Justice to award her $150,000.00 for general damages; $100,000.00 for punitive, exemplary and aggravated damages; interlocutory and permanent injunctions; and the costs of the proceeding on a substantial indemnity basis, plus applicable taxes.
"The conduct of the defendants as aforesaid has been malicious, abusive, egregious, reprehensible and was carried out in a flagrant disregard for Ms. Miranda’s business and personal reputation. Such conduct warrants the imposition of punitive, aggravated and exemplary damages, or any of them, against the defendants," the lawyers said.
Ms. Miranda's libel suit is the fifth to be filed against Ms. Cusipag and Balita since 2016. Of the four where this reporter was also a defendant, she lost in two. The two other cases were not pursued for lack of interest and the death of the complainant.
"The high-handed way that the defendants conducted their affairs warrants the condemnation of this court. The defendants, including their agents, had complete knowledge of the falsity of the Defamatory Publications and the harm it caused to Ms. Miranda," the lawyers added. (Copyright 2023. All Rights Reserved).
When will this end?? - Ores Ting, Scarborough
ReplyDelete