Investor Elaine Stead defamed by ‘cretin’ remark by AFR columnist Joe Aston

Venture capitalist Elaine Stead has won $280,000 in damages after judge ­Michael Lee found she had been defamed by AFR columnist Joe Aston.

Columnist Joe Aston. Picture: Jane Dempster

Venture capitalist Elaine Stead has won $280,000 in aggravated and ordinary damages in the ­Federal Court, after judge ­Michael Lee found she had been defamed by The Australian ­Financial Review columnist Joe Aston.

Aston and his employer, Nine Entertainment, were sued after the Rear Window columnist called Dr Stead a “cretin” who “set fire to other ­people’s money’’.

He said this was his honestly held opinion, but Justice Lee said that opinion was not based on identifiable facts.

A spokesman for Nine, on ­behalf of the Financial Review, said it was disappointed with the decision, and it would appeal.

“The Financial Review is proud of Mr Aston’s work, and we will continue to report on important corporate governance issues without fear or favour,” a statement said. “The damages awarded of $280,000 are low compared to many other judgments in this area of law. They are dwarfed by both sides’ legal fees which ­exceed $2m.”

Leading defamation lawyer Justin Quill said of the judgment: “This was the expression of an opinion by a columnist that, while very harsh, was honestly held that has cost a media company a great deal of money.

“It is perhaps another example of why we need defamation ­reform in this country. And while that’s on the horizon, I do wonder whether it will be enough to shift the balance back towards free speech.

“Having said that, the damages award does seems to be in a sensible range — unlike many other cases we’ve seen recently.

Leading defamation lawyer Rebekah Giles of Company Giles, who has handled defamation matters for Sarah Hanson-Young among others, said the judgment was “a timely reminder: you can’t say whatever you want. You need to have a proper factual basis for your opinions. Sometimes, columnists will target people, and it becomes a campaign, but they need to be ready to prove the truth of what they are saying.”

In a statement after the judgment in Sydney, Dr Stead said: “I am very pleased that his Honour has found the AFR and Mr Aston are liable for what they said about me.

“I hope the judgment brings an end to more than two years of personal embarrassment, anxiety and distress, although I will never be able to completely undo all the damage.”

Justice Lee did have some fond words for Aston, and some ­encouraging ones for the media.

Columnists are entitled to their opinions, he said. But those opinions must be properly held.

In this case, it seemed to ­Justice Lee that Aston had ­engaged in something that more closely amounted to “a form of bullying’’.

“It is common ground that Mr Aston is a talented and oftentimes highly entertaining wordsmith,” Justice Lee said, in his judgment.

Elaine Stead leaving court. Picture: Jane Dempster

His columns were acerbic, and often amusing, but “one suspects the mirth of some readers might be mixed with a vague sense of disquiet that their own behaviour might some day become the subject of his mocking focus’’.

But Dr Stead’s legal team ­believed Aston not only crossed that line, he “pole-vaulted it’’.

Aston disagreed, telling the court during his evidence that he described Dr Stead as a cretin ­because he honestly believed she was actually stupid, on the basis of investments she made while she was a director of the failed Blue Sky investment vehicle.

“Stupid is as stupid does,” he told the court.

But that’s a famous line from a movie, and Justice Lee said: “Mr Aston is not to be confused with Forrest Gump.”

The judge said most people would agree that to be a cretin was to be brainless, or grossly stupid. The evidence suggested Dr Stead was a highly educated, intelligent woman, he said.

Justice Lee noted that some of Dr Stead’s colleagues at Blue Sky were concerned about her tweets, and wanted to take her phone away from her, since she was chatting to “her peeps” in an unguarded way, during the company meltdown.

He seemed utterly perplexed at the willingness of so many ­people on social media to “share feelings on everything from fascism to fishfingers’’.

All this “emoting” and “recounting the mundane” was to him “decidedly odd’’.

Justice Lee noted that even Aston, while denouncing Dr Stead’s “asinine posts” on Instagram was himself making posts about “foot massages, or milkshakes’’.

Aston described Dr Stead as Brick Tamland, a character from the Anchorman who is ­described in the film as a “man with an IQ of 48 … what some people call it mentally retarded’’.

Aston told the court that Dr Stead appeared to be “in on the joke” since she changed her profile picture on social media to the Brick Tamland character.

“One might ask: what was she supposed to do?” Justice Lee said.

“She was being seriously mocked by Australia’s leading ­financial daily (who described her) as a gaping moron.”

Justice Lee said Dr Stead did experience a “high degree of subjective harm” and he concluded that the appropriate award of ­ordinary and aggravated compensatory damages should be $280,000.

“Words matter,” he said. “I can’t help her feeling we wouldn’t be here … if he had chosen words with less vitriol,’' Justice Lee said.