05/02/2020 2016 ONCJ 35 (CanLII) | CanLII doing the artwork. There is no apparent seething anger in Mr. Elliott’s emails, and Ms. Guthrie could not point to any in cross-examination. She agreed in cross-examination that his email after the disagreement about Mr. Elliott’s comments on the reporter and the mayor was pretty straightforward. She also agreed that when she testified to Mr. Elliott being a creep at the dinner and that one of the reasons for rejecting his offer to design the poster and logo was his treatment of women, she may have been looking back through the lens of what happened later. That frankness enhances her credibility. Regarding the interactions until May 3, Ms. Guthrie testified that things really took a bad turn around the Bendilin Spurr incident in early July 2012, i.e., more than two months after the dinner. Until May 3, there was no criminal harassment. The record to this date gives context for the later allegation – evidence of all the circumstances, should I need to determine the reasonableness of Ms. Guthrie’s fear – but no harassment. The exchanges until then – debate about language in February, dinner in April and negotiations about artwork, the straightforward exchange as Ms. Guthrie rejected Mr. Elliott’s offer to do artwork and falsely told him he was kind and awesome – is relevant to Mr. Elliott’s knowledge, then and later. All the evidence demonstrates that he was working from the premise that their email and Twitter exchanges were appropriate. From May 3 to July 6 During this period, Ms. Guthrie broke her ankle. Mr. Elliott discerned from a tweet, not to him, that she was immobilized. He asked her why. She expressed no dismay that he was following her tweets, but answered. He repeatedly offered to drive her or deliver alcohol, and she repeatedly declined. He also invited her to accompany him on a drive up north. She politely declined and referred to her boyfriend, and he stopped. Mr. Elliott was obviously interested in some sort of relationship with Ms. Guthrie. But Ms. Guthrie rebuffed him politely and appropriately despite the unsuccessful negotiations about the poster and the disagreement about the reporter and the mayor. Ms. Guthrie testified that she was not being entirely honest in her courteous emails and tweets to Mr. Elliott. She testified that she feared him from the time she had dinner with him – as being “creeped out” is a kind of fear – but that she was wrestling with her feelings given that women are criticized when they express them. The Bendilin Spurr affair Mr. Spurr, a young man from Sault St. Marie, Ont., put a video game on the internet that permitted players to punch a prominent American feminist in the face. It was graphic in its violence. Ms. Guthrie tweeted about it on July 6 as follows: “So, I found the Twitter account of that fuck listed as creator of the ‘punch a woman in the face’ game. Should I sic the internet on him?” Apparently her followers and others who read her tweet said she should. As she wrote later:[24] Knowing full well the can of worms I was about to open, I’ll admit my heart was in my throat as I tweeted, “Hey bendilin, do you punch women in the face IRL, or just on the internet? (This guy made the Anita Sarkeesian Face-Punch game). Others, RT” “IRL” means in real life. I set out this tweet and its introduction both to develop the narrative and to demonstrate how Ms. Guthrie uses Twitter – what she sees as appropriate and within bounds. Ms. Guthrie sent a tweet linking his local newspaper to a story about his work, and tweeted: “Sault Saint Marie employers, if you get a resume from @BendilinSpurr, he made a woman facepunching game…” She attached an article from the Huffington Post online site about the “sick” online game that invited users to beat up a virtual Anita Sarkeesian. Everything happened rapidly at the moment that Ms. Guthrie says was the turning point. Mr. Elliott tweeted directly to Ms. Guthrie: “@amirightfolks He’s got 11 followers. Why bring attention to the guy? Media attention will only add to more ‘virtual face punching.’” Mr. Elliott tweeted that it was revenge. Ms. Guthrie replied, putting a period before Mr. Elliott’s handle: “.@greg_a_Elliott Because I think the Sault Ste Marie community should be aware there is a monster in their midst.” The exchange was becoming heated, but was a logical and fair debate. file:///Users/nerissa/Downloads/Columbia CSV/R v Gregory Allan Elliott.htm 18/43