Article content continued

Ironically, Peterson said he launched his first lawsuit to prevent universities from gagging free speech by those “who didn’t conform to their radical leftist and identity politics,” his new lawsuit alleged.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

“Peterson expressed hope that his lawsuit, along with Shepherd’s lawsuit … would end that reality on many university campuses,” the lawsuit alleged.

In a Statement of Defence filed two weeks ago, the University and three defendants deny they defamed Peterson, and suggest the U of T prof consented to and profited from Shepherd’s release of the controversial audio recording.

Lawyers Alexander Pettingill and Sean Murtha, representing Laurier and its former manager Adria Joel, claim Peterson “authorized, consented and/or knowingly acquiesced to Shepherd posting the recording of the impugned words to YouTube.”

Peterson’s lawyer Howard Levitt sharply criticized the allegation that Peterson’s star rose since the slanderous tape.

Photo by Dave Abel / Postmedia Network

“Suggesting he was advantaged by this is inaccurate and comparable to asserting those who survived the Holocaust should be grateful to their oppressors for teaching them survival skills,” he said.

Peterson’s suit cited 14 defamatory statements spoken, including a comparison of Peterson’s comments to a speech by Adolf Hitler.

“There is inescapable irony in the fact that the University, after having admitted that the conduct of the individual defendants was entirely improper, have responded to being sued for that admitted misconduct by not only justifying its actions but claiming the slanderous comments were truthful,” stated Levitt.

Peterson is seeking $500,000 for defamation, $500,000 for injurious falsehood and $500,000 in punitive damages.

None of the allegations have been proven.

spazzano@postmedia.com