File Photo (Image Credit: CFJC Today)

By Michael Reeve

DEFAMATION SUIT

Adjournment decision expected Tuesday on Hamer-Jackson’s defamation suit against Neustaeter

Jul 7, 2025 | 4:20 PM

KAMLOOPS — Kamloops Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson, and councillor Katie Neustaeter were in BC civil court on Monday (July 7), hearing an adjournment application filed by Hamer-Jackson late last week.

Hamer-Jackson, who previously suggested he planned to represent himself in the defamation suit, has now secured representation from an Alberta law firm. It’s the same firm that represented Kathrine Wunderlich in the alternative approval process (AAP) case against the City of Kamloops earlier this year.

The case, brought by Hamer-Jackson alleges four instances of defamation by Neustaeter, three were statements made to council in emails between council and staff, and the fourth was a statement made on behalf of council back in 2023 in response to proposed changes to the committee structure at city hall.

The merits of the defamation case, and an application to dismiss by Neustaeter, however were not at issue on Monday, as Hamer-Jackson, along with his newly secured legal counsel applied for a 45 day adjournment.

Stay Ahead of the Curve with Kamloops' Trusted Property Manager - Rohit Kumar

May 20, 2025

Question of the Week

Do you expect staffing cuts in public schools will negatively impact your child's education when school resumes next month?

3h ago

1000 Ways to Heal

1000 Ways to Heal: Decolonization - What Does That Mean?

6h ago

Hamer-Jackson’s lawyer Judy Wells, stated they were only retained as counsel last Thursday (July 3), and have not had enough time to properly prepare. And that if the application to dismiss was to go forward this week, they would not be able to provide any evidence and will not be able to properly respond to the application.

In response to why Hamer-Jackson had not filed the correct information for the hearing while he was self-representing, the mayor’s own lawyer argued that Hamer-Jackson’s attempts to self represent were ill-forged, saying he didn’t know what he was doing, calling him ‘a fish out of water’. She stated that Hamer-Jackson spent seven months attempting to secure counsel before being forced to go to Alberta to find somebody to represent him.

Wells stated that if the adjournment is not granted, that only Hamer-Jackson will not receive justice, and that Neustaeter will receive it either way. And that a 15 month delay would not be considered extensive.

Neustaeter is represented by Daniel Reid, who argued there is a pattern in Hamer-Jackson’s actions, alleging he elected to not do anything until days before the case was set to be heard. The lawyer outlined multiple emails and letters between his firm and Hamer-Jackson, stating the need for the mayor to file his application response ahead of the hearing and to seek legal representation.

Neustaeter’s lawyer also alleged a pattern, with Hamer-Jackson applying for an adjournment on the Thursday before the case, saying it has now been done twice, first back in January and now last week. Telling Justice Jacqueline Hughes that in his opinion, the plaintiff can’t ‘do nothing, then show up and request an adjournment’. Calling the late decision to request an adjournment a ‘deliberate attempt to delay’.

After hearing all the submissions on the proposed adjournment, Justice Hughes reserved her decision until Tuesday (July 8) when she is expected to deliver a verbal ruling at 10:00 a.m.