Westport accountant loses defamation case against Buller Mayor

First published on

Westport accountant Frank Dooley has lost his defamation case against Buller Mayor Jamie Cleine.

The case centred on Cleine's claim Dooley physically threatened the then deputy mayor, Sharon Roche, at a public Te Tai o Poutini Plan (TTPP) meeting in Westport in February, 2022.

Dooley, who is now a West Coast regional councillor, admitted he "flipped" and swore at Roche, but denied raising his fist at her.

Dooley alleged Cleine defamed him in subsequent statements to the media and a letter to Coast council chief executives, which Dooley said gravely damaged his personal and professional reputation.

The six-day trial concluded in the Westport District Court on 16 October. Judge Kevin Kelly released his reserved judgement on Wednesday.

Judge Kelly said he was not persuaded that Cleine had defamed Dooley. Nor was he persuaded Cleine's subsequent media comments and letter were motivated by malice.

The judge said Dooley was agitated before the TTPP meeting started, due to his concerns about TTPP provisions, and was determined to ask his questions with little regard for others present.

In Dooley's own words there was "…no friggin way [he was] going to sit back and let this plan be adopted in its current form…"

Judge Kelly said he was persuaded that Dooley had advanced angrily on Roche.

"Viewed objectively, Mr Dooley acted in a way that can be described colloquially as self-entitled. He was rude and aggressive in his manner to the presenters."

Dooley had accepted he verbally abused Roche, swearing at her in an angry tone, and that his language was inappropriate and unprofessional, the judge said.

"I do not accept that Mr Dooley simply put his hand up twice when he told Ms Roche to 'f… off' or 'piss off' or that he was simply waving Ms Roche off."

Dooley's witnesses were some distance away from the altercation and their line of sight was likely obscured, whereas Roche was directly in front of Dooley. Cleine's witnesses had a better view, Judge Kelly said.

Five of Dooley's witnesses said Dooley had gestured with a wave of his hand. That evidence lacked credibility when Dooley himself had demonstrated a different action to the court and to police, the judge said.

Dooley had accepted his language and behaviour were inappropriate and said he might have been pointing his finger at Roche.

"I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Dooley did raise a fist to Ms Roche, in combination with him pointing his finger at Ms Roche while in close proximity. Even if I am wrong and it was just a pointed finger, in close proximity the action was aggressive and threatening."

However, Judge Kelly said there was no evidence Dooley had touched Roche in any way.

The judge was not satisfied that readers of the mayor's account in the Westport News the next day would have identified Dooley.

He said Dooley had identified himself in a letter sent to the editor of The News in the early hours of 23 February, 2022, less than 12 hours after the article was published. The letter, published by the paper that afternoon, disputed Cleine's version of events but apologised for the verbal tirade.

"From that point Mr Cleine cannot be held responsible for naming Mr Dooley as he did this himself," Judge Kelly said.

Nor was the judge persuaded that Cleine's comments to The News, or his letter to council chief executives, defamed Dooley.

"The statements made, in my view, are true or not materially different from the truth."

He was satisfied neither the comments nor the letter were motivated by malice sparked by previous disagreements with Dooley.

"The simple point remains that the incident at the TTPP was down to Mr Dooley and Mr Dooley alone. It was Mr Dooley who interrupted the presenters. Ms Roche sought to get the presentation back on track and it was Mr Dooley alone who reacted in an aggressive and threatening fashion."

Cleine had released his letter to the Greymouth Star in good faith, following a request under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act, the judge said.

The letter was protected by qualified privilege.

Cleine was prima facie entitled to costs, Judge Kelly said. He reserved his decision and invited the parties to reach agreement. If they couldn't agree, Cleine had 15 working days to file a memorandum and Dooley had 15 working days to respond, then the judge would make a decision on the papers.

Cleine told The News he was relieved with the finding and pleased to put the event behind him.

"The judge ruled that we were accurate in our description of events and that the way it impacted on the various victims of event that night was an accurate description and the judgement reflects that."

The mayor said he was seeking further legal advice on whether costs would be sought.

"I would think given the findings were pretty definitive then I think they would be looking for that, I think, in some form."

Although his legal costs were covered by council's insurance, ratepayers' funds had covered the excess of about $20,000, plus other associated costs with the case, like travel.

He was unsure how much the case had cost insurers but believed it would be in the "hundreds of thousands".

Dooley said was "naturally disappointed" with the judgement.

"I'm pleased that the judgement clearly concluded that I did not hit or touch anybody."

He was unsure if he would appeal the judgement and said he had no expectations on final costs.