Barbara Kay: Cómo la misandria arruinó la carrera de Steven Galloway

A defamation trial involving former University of British Columbia creative writing department head Steven Galloway is currently underway in the B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver. The proceedings focus on allegations made over a decade ago regarding sexual misconduct. On Tuesday, the court heard testimony from Stephen Bohnen, a retired UBC community relations officer. Bohnen stated that he has no recollection of calling Galloway a serial predator, a claim previously advanced by Galloway’s accuser. This testimony directly challenged the narrative presented by the complainant, identified in court documents as A.B. due to a publication ban protecting her identity. The trial marks a continuation of a long-standing legal dispute initiated by Galloway in 2018. He sued individuals associated with the university who either alleged rape against him or publicly supported such accusations. According to reports, the majority of defendants named in the original claim have since settled out of court. Many of these parties have issued public apologies. However, four defendants remain in litigation. Additionally, A.B., the primary alleged victim, recently withdrew from participating in the trial. By doing so, she dropped her legal defenses based on truth and fair comment. Bohnen testified that A.B. visited his office in 2013. She complained that Galloway had provided her with multiple drinks of hard liquor and subsequently propositioned her for sex. A.B. told Bohnen that this interaction was not an isolated incident. Bohnen explained that his department produced incident reports for documentation purposes rather than conducting formal investigations. During cross-examination, Galloway’s lawyer, Daniel Burnett, reviewed the 2013 incident report with Bohnen. Burnett then displayed an email sent by A.B. to another individual. In that correspondence, A.B. described Bohnen, whom she referred to as Steve, as the head of campus security. She claimed he assisted her in putting safety measures in place. The current hearings follow previous coverage detailing what observers describe as a ten-year campaign that significantly impacted Galloway’s professional standing and personal well-being. Galloway is an award-winning Canadian writer. His tenure at UBC ended amid the controversy surrounding these allegations. The legal battle has drawn attention to the broader implications of unsubstantiated claims within academic institutions. Columnists Jamie Sarkonak and Amy Hamm have provided detailed accounts of the procedural history leading to the present trial. Their reporting highlights the duration of the conflict and its effect on Galloway’s mental health and artistic output. Witnesses have taken the stand to clarify specific interactions from 2013. The role of campus staff in handling complaints during that period is under scrutiny. Bohnen’s position as a community relations officer contrasts with the title attributed to him in A.B.’s later communications. The discrepancy forms part of the evidentiary record being examined by the judge. Legal teams are testing the consistency of statements made years apart. The withdrawal of A.B. from active participation complicates the defense strategy for the remaining defendants. Her absence means the court relies heavily on documentary evidence and third-party testimonies to establish the sequence of events. Galloway exited the courthouse on October 5, 2026, following the day’s proceedings. Photographers captured him leaving the building. The case involves complex questions regarding institutional response protocols and individual liability for speech. The settlement of most claims suggests a resolution for many parties, yet the core issues persist in the ongoing litigation. The remaining defendants face the prospect of continued judicial review. The outcome will depend on how the court weighs the conflicting accounts of the 2013 encounter and subsequent communications. The trial environment remains focused on factual reconstruction. Lawyers present emails, reports, and witness memories to build their cases. The distinction between documenting an incident and investigating it was highlighted in Bohnen’s explanation of his duties. This nuance may influence how the court views the initial handling of the complaint. As the trial progresses, further witnesses are expected to provide perspectives on the dynamics within the creative writing department at that time. The stakes involve both civil damages and reputational restoration for Galloway. Conversely, the defendants seek to validate their past actions and statements. The legal process continues to unfold with daily hearings scheduled at the B.C. Supreme Court.