The B.C. Supreme Court found that John Allen, former Harrison Hot Springs mayor and councillor, published a series of defamatory comments regarding realtor Freddy Marks, including references to Nazis, Hitler and brownshirts.

Allen was ordered to pay $110,000 in general damages and $50,000 in aggravated damages. Aggravated damages are awarded “in circumstances where the defendant’s conduct has been particularly high-handed or oppressive, increasing the mental distress and humiliation of the plaintiff.” Determining if aggravated damages are warranted includes finding actual malice.

Details of the case and the ruling against Allen were recently released by the B.C. Supreme Court via Justice Mark Underhill.

In this specific case, Underhill said Allen’s actions “increased the mental distress and humiliation of Mr. Marks.”

“I have found the presence of malice for all of the defamatory publications, and that Mr. Allen acted out of spite and animus towards Mr. Marks,” Underhill wrote. “I also found that he was reckless in using analogies to Hitler’s regime and in stating facts that he knew were not true. A particularly important factor here is the impact of the Hitler comparisons on Mr. Marks in light of his personal family history and the loss of family members to the Nazi regime.”

“I have no hesitation in finding that Mr. Allen has engaged in what is properly described as harmful and socially destructive behaviour, ranging well beyond the impugned publications. There was an overwhelming body of evidence confirming the detrimental effects of his prolific correspondence and (Facebook) posts, many of which contained inflammatory accusations and personal attacks against a variety of individuals,” Underhill continued.

It all began with a dispute about a fence line.

Plaintiff and Defendant

According to recently-released documents from the B.C. Supreme Court, Marks filed the claim against Allen in May 2020 based on a series of Facebook posts made between 2018 and 2023.

While Marks is a realtor, he was also once involved with the village’s Advisory Planning Commission (APC), chairing the committee in 2012 and 2016. He resigned in 2019.

Allen has served the village in elected office several times since the 1970s, most recently ending a run as councillor toward the end of 2023, when he resigned to run for mayor a few months later. He lost to Fred Talen. 

According to court documents, Allen frequently posts on Facebook, particularly in the private group Harrison Hot Springs News and Views. While court documents say the group is technically private, News and Views currently hosts about 5,100 members – more than twice the size of the village of Harrison. Court documents cited this group throughout as one of the places where Allen has posted defamatory statements against Marks.

A Trespassed Fire Engine

According to Underhill’s summary, in the summer of 2018, Allen published a post on Facebook about the renovation of the former Quiet Stream Motel, which the Harrison Hot Springs Resort had purchased in 2017. Allen raised a number of concerns, including the construction of fence posts to an adjacent laneway that was owned by the village, which Allen claimed was the only legal access to his property across the Miami River. He further alleged that then-Mayor Leo Facio and the resort had a “special relationship” because a family member of Facio’s worked for the resort at the time.

Court documents say that Allen parked an old fire truck in the laneway to obstruct the construction of the fence, generating significant attention from the village.

Allen received a letter from Christopher Murdy, a lawyer retained by the village, stating that Allen’s fire truck was in trespass and the village has the right to take legal action or have the truck impounded. Allen responded with his own letter, referring to “the little cabal of the Mayor’s buddies (Freddy Marks and Dan Kurtz) who are making money off this deal may be the real beneficiaries.”

This marked the first of what Underhill called “the impugned publications” in his ruling. Court documents say that Allen specifically mentioned Marks by name and made Nazi-related comments against Marks in the impugned publications, which included subsequent correspondences and Facebook posts on News and Views.

‘Old Nazi’

In November 2019, the conflict between Allen and Marks turned physical. According to court documents, council had approved a development application from Marks to subdivide his property. The court documents indicated Marks admitted several times to pushing Allen after the meeting. Allen said the push was unprovoked while Marks said it was a response to Allen reportedly calling Marks an “old Nazi” in an exchange following the council meeting.

According to court documents, Marks was born and raised in Germany; Nazis executed two of his great uncles for their role in the Dutch resistance. Underhill said while there were several witnesses, none of them observed the full sequence of events, but the justice later concluded that Marks was a credible witness.

“It was suggested to him that he testified that he could not recall if he did so because he could not be sure when he made up the allegation to justify his actions that night,” Underhill wrote. “He was forthright in rejecting that proposition, and his evidence was also confirmed by other witnesses…who testified they learned of the Nazi comment from Mr. Marks in the days following the meeting. I had no concerns with the credibility of the vast majority of witnesses who testified at the trial.”

Concerning the November 2019 altercation, Underhill said Allen “greatly exaggerated” the entire sequence of events.

Hubris at the Heart

Underhill said Allen’s “hubris and his resentment towards those who he perceived as challenging or supplanting his once prominent role in the community” is at the heart of the trial.

“I have the most concern with the credibility of Mr. Allen,” Underhill wrote in his summary. “Throughout his evidence-in-chief and cross-examination, Mr. Allen was consistently long-winded and largely unable to provide straightforward answers or accept uncontroversial propositions. He is obviously an intelligent and relatively accomplished individual, but often digressed into unnecessary and sometimes prolix discussions of his abilities and experiences.”

While Underhill believed a sense of civic duty and passion for community fuelled Allen’s efforts toward positions of power in the village, he also said “considerable resentment” for previous losses played a factor.

“Those feelings of resentment became apparent when he was cross-examined on the appointment of Mr. Marks to the APC, a position he also sought. He expressed the view that the community had been deprived of the depth of his knowledge and valuable skill set, and that he deserved to be on the APC. I have no doubt that the resentment of being left off the APC was a motivating factor in the language he chose to direct at Mr. Marks (and others),” Underhill wrote.

A long, difficult chapter

Marks issued a press statement on Monday, May 26, expressing relief that this “long, difficult chapter” has ended.

“Over the past decade, my family and I have faced dehumanizing accusations. In our community, some people stopped speaking to us,” Marks stated. “These actions have caused us emotional harm and isolation in a place we call home, and we had no choice but to defend our reputation and integrity in court. We now look forward to putting this behind us. We will continue to serve our clients and community with the same dedication, professionalism, and commitment that have defined our work for over 40 years.”

In an emailed statement to The Observer via one of his lawyers, Allen said he is “very disappointed” in the result.

“I continue to be very concerned about my community,” Allen stated. “I was assaulted in the village council chamber and feel re-victimized by this lawsuit against me. I am taking legal advice and will act in due course. I do not want to argue this matter publicly at this time.”