Arthur Kent defamation trial jury dismissed after 'inflammatory' opening remarks

A defamation trial involving veteran war correspondent Arthur Kent and Canada's largest newspaper chain is proceeding by judge alone after the jury was dismissed, with the judge citing "inflammatory" andprejudicial remarks made by Kent's lawyer.

Kent who was nicknamed the "Scud Stud" for his reporting for an American network during the Persian Gulf War has waged a prolonged lawsuit againstPostmediaNetworkamong othersover an article written during his bid for a seat as a Progressive Conservative in the 2008 Alberta election.

• OTHER COURT NEWS |Red Deer man arrested for stealing truck with two children inside
• OTHER CRIME NEWS |Attack on youth was gay bashing: Police

Then-National Post columnist Don Martin wrote an article about Kent's campaign in the riding ofCalgary-Currie.In the column, he referred to Kentas the "Scud Dud."

Some of the comments were inflammatory and, in my view, they aresufficiently serious and damaging that they cannot besatisfactorilyaddressedwith a correctiveinstruction to the jury.-JudgeJo'AnneStrekaf, in dismissing jury

Kent's statements of claim say he was described in the column as having an oversized ego and anunorganizedand incompetent campaign.Kent claimedthat article injured his reputation, character and credibility.

The lawsuit finally headed to court Monday.

However, thePostmedialawyers objected to opening statements fromKent's lawyer, Kent Jesse, to the jury on Monday.

"Not only did the defendants publish an article that was unfair,hurtfulbut they did so with malicious intent," Jesse told the jury.

"Because Don Martin wrote the article with the intent to harm ArthurKent's reputation, he acted with malice."

As soon as he finished his opening statement, lawyers forPostmediaarguedfor a mistrial.

They saidJesse "impugned"Martin's reputation by statingit asfacts thatMartin had written the column maliciously and thatPostmediahad known it was inaccurate.Jesse should have presented the comments asallegations thathewouldlater try to prove, they argued.

JudgeJo'AnneStrekafagreed Tuesday morning anddismissed the jury, decidingit wasnot possible to correct the potential damage done.

"Some of the comments were inflammatory and, in my view, they aresufficiently serious and damaging that they cannot besatisfactorilyaddressedwith a correctiveinstruction to the jury," saidStrekafin her decision.

The trial continuedbeforeStrekafonTuesday afternoon after defence lawyers agreed to Kent's proposal toproceed by judge alone.