Article content continued

She was then called into a disciplinary meeting with three school officials, during which she was castigated for exposing students to Peterson’s message. The officials had much to say about Peterson in the closed-door meeting, much of it unflattering. Nathan Rambukkana, the professor of the course for which Shepherd was assisting, said showing the clip is like neutrally playing a speech by Adolf Hitler.

An audio recording of the meeting caused an uproar and the school later apologized to Shepherd, but not Peterson.

In June, Shepherd and Peterson separately sued Laurier and the officials who conducted the meeting.

Photo by Tyler Anderson/National Post

Shepherd claimed the school’s “attack” made her “unemployable in academia.” Peterson claimed school officials defamed him in the meeting, “demonized” him and diminished his reputation.

In its defence against Peterson’s suit, the school earlier filed court documents and issued a press release. Peterson’s retort Tuesday took aim at both.

Peterson’s new lawsuit claims further defamation and damage by the school.

A media statement from Laurier at the time accused Peterson of filing his suit “as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest” and for the purpose of “causing academics and administrators to be more circumspect in their choice of words.”

Peterson’s lawyer, Howard Levitt, said that falsely attacked a core value of his client.

“He was trying to prevent people, in closed-door sessions, from viciously demonizing a student, and himself, when they try to have an academic discussion and suppress her academic freedom. He wants to make sure that professors simply won’t conduct themselves that way; that they not be so politically correct that they won’t allow anyone to have any other view without being attacked.”