Zytoon Boots Gay Patrons & Promptly Pays the Price

This is classic, irresponsible, yellow "journalism" at its worst. Carolyn, you may have had an experience as you describe, but I

strongly doubt it was a "couple months ago" by the owner of Zytoon's. You seem to have a fairly loose grasp of some key facts, and

Tanjas failure to fulfill the most basic of journalistic repsonobility - by trying to speak to "Aziz" smack of vindictive slander,

rather than credibility.

But wow - why let factual research get in the way of a great story? So what if you slander innocent people, or business in the

process right?

If there was justice in this world - there would be a massive lawsuit coming your way, but the former owner of Zytoons the

restaurant you so carelessly slander, is one of the very least confrontation persons I have ever met.

Perhaps your alleged incident occured this month (June)? The owner of Zytoon's until the end of May was a person named Sori, not

someone named Aziz. I know Sori, the former owner well, and he had been contemplating selling the business for months. Sorry for

the blow to your ego, but if this is the change of ownership you are referring to, it's not about you. Then again you seem utterly

confused as to the ownership history of Zytoons.

Tanja you talk about a "class act", while at the same time noting that Caroline wanted to hold a "kissing protest". That's not

about "freedom and love", that's pure and simple lustful immaturity. Anyone with "class", queer or straight, limits their PDAs to

hand holding, hugs, and platonic kiss greetings. No one with class, straight or queer, "makes out" in public. It's rude and

inappropriate public behaviour. Get a room! I have to wonder how you really acted, since you it seems you don't understand what

is socially respectful public behaviour - whether straight or queer.

The owner of Zytoons "a couple months ago" was the warmest, friendliest, and most tolerant restauranter Roncesvalles has had in

the 7 years I have lived in the neighbourhood.

Sori knew all of his regular customers by name, would regularly give free food to the homeless person on his strip, and was

accepting of everyone to a fault. One of his clients a stripper, who acted quite ditzy, even took advantage of him, by leaving

her baby, running out the door, saying "back in 5 minutes" - and of course she left for 1 hour, with Sori being the only person

running the restuaraurant. Depsite this, Sori continued to show her the same respect he did to everyone. He's also in a very

happy inter-racial marriage. Hardly the "bigot" type.

Sori also took great pride in the food he prepared. The quality of the food went up dramatically when Sori took over. He had to

raise his prices a little, and in the process lost all of the $1.99 crowd that came to the place before. Any such transistion

take time, up to a couple years. Sori didn't have the resources to wait this long or invest in some of upgrades necessary for more

rapid success. What saddened Sori most about selling the business, was the closeness he had with so many customers.

I personally, together with other clients of Soris, witnessed some incidents were people were outlandishly rude to him. Yet,

Sori would never say anyting rude in return, he would not even so much as raise his voice - and never once, did I ever see him ask

anyone to leave. One of the ways Sori dealt with these experiences is by venting to me about them - yet I never once heard him

say anything remotely "discriminating" of any kind. If anything Sori served as a model, of how all people should be to make this

work a better place.

Yeah this story really made no sense to me. It sounds like a gross exaggeration, everything is very vague, and we don't know the other side of the story.

Carolina,

Before any intelligent, rational person could possibly support you, they would need to know the other side of the story. There are many lemmings out there, who think of nothing else all day long other than "defending a cause" that they blind themselves to reality, and proper investigation, never giving thought to the fact they may be doing damage to an innocent person. That is more deplorable than any alleged incident.

Neither you, nor Sori have english as a first language, which doubles the chance of having a misunderstanding.

Was there anyone else at the restaurant who witnessed this alleged incident, and would back up your story?

No doubt once you assumed it must simply be about your being gay, you closed your mind to the fact that what you THINK happened may not be what ACTUALLY happened, and immediately and rather blindly went into "activist mode", completely and instantly closing your mind to the fact, that perhaps your interpretation of events is wrong and/or exaggerated.

When I do speak out for a cause - 90% of the time it is to defend the rights of queers - alienating even my own family in the process. I find homophobic bigotry to particularly deplorable. I have zero tolerance, however, for raving lunatics that start chanting in chorus for taking action against someone, when they have no knowlegde whatsoever of what actually happened - just the unverifiable, and overly agitated rantings of one person.

The first time I read your story, it seemed like you had been exagerrating - making more out of the incident than what actually happened. You immediately assumed the "incident" that you claim happened, was due entirely and only to your being gay. You probably, understandably, feel defensive about your rights to show affections in the same manner as any straight couple, but for all couples, there is a differene between being romantic and being rude.

As you are new to the country, and I think English is not your first language, it seems some of my comments were lost in translation - particularly the one about "making out".

I am not missing any of the things described, in fact I specifically mentioned hand-holding, and other "simple" affections as acceptable behaviour in public.

Perhaps it would be more clear if I give examples of what is inappropriate - hugs are fine, but fondling each other - that is moving one's hands all over their partner constantly, without stopping, especially if putting hands on the other persons' sexual areas is extremely inappropriate public behaviour. No one else needs to see that. If you feel the need to do that in public, it's not love, it's just plain lust - the sexual feeling itself, along with exhibitionist tendencies (the need to act out in front of others).

A quick kiss is fine, but a lip locked kiss where you twist tongues together for an extended period of time, and especially doing so repeatedly is not acceptable, straight or queer.

I am hardly oppressed - I'm pretty sure I have done things you have not - yet I understand there is a time and a place for certain things, and some actions do not belong in public. Or would you think it romantic if people just stripped their clothes on the street and started f*cking each other in plain view? Yes that last example was extreme, but I used the extreme to make a point - that not all displays of affection are appropriate in public, and any decent person is also considerate of others.

Now in being considerate, I don't for one minute mean to say that a queer couple should not be allowed to share the same public affections that are acceptable for straight people. Thaat would be discrimination, and applying such a double standard is not acceptable. Queers should be treated no different than straight people.

Having seen Sori in several situations were people were outright rude to him, he was always very calm, was never rude in return, and often was simply confused as to why people were being rude. There was no reason - the other people were just rude. And again, as I said before, I have never once heard any type of discriminatory comment from Sori, and I used to eat at Zytoon and chat with Sori an average of 3 times per week. Sori's personality, and his demeanour (the way he acts) is not at all consistent with the behaviour you describe.

And what was a police officer supposed to protect your from? Was a police officer there to witness any of the incident you describe? If not then it is simply your word against that of another person.

Now I was not there to see what happened, and unfortunately since Zytoons closed I no longer have my regular chats with Sori.

If there are no witnesses to back up your extreme claims, then this is simply a case of your word against his - and in fact, not even his word, as this story so far is completely one-sided.

Therefore, character (what the person is like) of the persons involved must come into consideration. I don't know you - but you seem quite ready to rant on, without stopping to consider if this was a misunderstanding. Once locked into your "cause" the truth becomes irrelevant.

Having known Sori's character very well - I find your version of events to be EXTREMELY unlikely.

No doubt you have had many people rally around you - many persons as you seem to be, become mindless of the facts when they hear about something like this. They automatically assume it is true, and get worked up into a frenzy - and turn into a lunatic mob, which winds up lynching innocent people. I doubt that any of the people who get "worked up" over this have even met Sori once.

Tanja

Let's compare who has a "stronger basis", you or me.

I witnessed Sori in a great variety of situtations, with a great variety of people over more than 6 months. I listened to him vent to me many times, and had countless personal discussions with him over that time. Depsite hearing Sori vent to me many times, not once did I ever hear him utter something even remotely discriminatory.

You are correct that not being there, I can not say with 100% certainty that this event did not occur, although I can, given the strong basis upon which I knew Sori very well, state, as I did, that the events as reported are extremely unlikely.

No competent editor would publish a story, especially a story as explosive as this one, without doing their homework to ensure they have reliable factual information. And they certainly would not imbellish or create facts - they would report the story as "claims made by the complainant", certainly not as outright factual events.

Now let's examine your "strong basis" for publishing this story - and correct me if I am wrong here:

-you do not know any of the parties involved. Caroline approached you and shared a story.

-you did practically nothing to verify the story, perhaps contacted the Roncesvalles BIA, which I am not sure that Sori was even an active member of - hence what would they really know of this incident?

-despite your inability (or is it just blind rage or laziness?) to verify the story, you reported the story as a "fact" rather than as an alleged incident

-you showed a blatant further lack of personal integrity and/or judgement when you fabricated a headline proclaiming Zytoon closed as a result of this alleged incident - you have NOTHING to base that on

And as to the lunatic mob - I used that as a general description of what can happen when people get agitated around an issue - I did not link that to the "peaceful purpose" - you did. Go and check gaycanada where Caroline first published her story and read replies like "burn that m*therf*cker".

I think all on your own you demonstrate what I mean by a lunatic mob, particularly when you demonsrate a total lack of integrity by publising unvalidated, inciteful stories.

Tanja you seem to have a strong aversion to facts - such as to your legal liability in this situation. Should Sori wish to pursue this, you and Caroline will automatically be considered guilty of libel.

Even if comments posted are based on truths, that does not preclude being convicted of libel.

In fact Tanja, as stated in your headline, you clearly draw a connection between the alleged actions of Sori, and the demise of his business. That means that even if the actions that Sori is accused of turned out to be true (highly unlikely) you would be still be guilty of libel - and likely defamation.

I suggest you and Caroline read the following general information and then seek competent legal advice immediately. Should Sori wish to pursue any action against either of you, both of you are on VERY precarious grounds legally speaking.

In a nutshell, for all intents and purposes both of you would automatically be considered guilty - in Canadian libel law there is a reverse onus of proof - that's right - Sori does not have to prove you guilty, rather you have to prove yourself innocent - which giving what has transpired, you likely have little chance of doing.

While no doubt - you are having a knee-jerk reaction saying "no way! not in Canada - this is free speech!", this only shows your ignorance of the law. Free speech does not apply to libel. You will be very surprised at how harshly Canadian law treats those accused of libel.

I suggest you start by doing some googling on "Canadian Internet Libel Law Reverse Onus" - and then seek competent professional legal advice. It's going to be a very sobering experience for you.

Tanja, a conviction against you for libel would probably devastate you financially, and literally put an end to any possibility of fulfilling your goal of paid work in the publishing field as posted on your website.

Caroline - if you feel you have been wronged - pursue this through proper channels, but publicly posting accusations against someone, can very quickly get you into major legal trouble. As a recent arrival to Canada, being convicted of libel certainly is not going to help you, when you apply for landed immgrant status or citizenship. It would likely also devastate you financially. Again - if you feel you have been wronged - I do encourage you to pursue this through proper channels, but a public campaign like this puts you on very very precarious legal grounds.

Furthermore, under Canandian law, it is possible for this website itself to be considered liable for these postings. An OPP officer won a libel judgement against someone posting in an internet forum. That person scoffed saying they had no money to pay - the judgement was worthless. In repsonse - the court also filed judegment against ISP that hosted the forum - for what was considered a "token" amount - $40,000.

I'm not posting this to have an argument with you, but rather to call to your attention the situation you are now in - as clearly you have no clue.

I have taken snapshot of this website and posting, to preserve it as evidence should Sori contact me, and wish to pursue action against you, Caroline, BlogTO.com and Gaycanada.com

I would strongly reccomend an immediate retraction and apology. Doing so will in no way absolve you of libel, anymore than someon saying "sorry" to someone they have physically assaulted, but it might help mitigate any judgements against you.

Jerrold, you are hilarious.

Carolina

you simply don't get it - you certainly seem blinded by your own rage - as Tanya seems to be as well

It would be foolish to take solice in the Jerrold's disengenious attempt at humour. He is apparently blind to the fact that there have been many successful Canadian prosecutions for libel over the internet. This should come as no surprise, given the reverse onus of proof, and that Canada has the toughest libel laws in the entire western world.

I already encouraged you, if you feel you have been wronged, to pursue this through the proper channels - and doing so with public accusations is not one of them - and that's they key problem I have with yourself and especially Tanja. You DON'T try someone in the court of public opinion prior to a real trial - there are specific laws against this - and the penalities can be harsh. That's why you always see any article from a valid news source use words like "the accused" and "alleged" every single time.

It is your claim that Sori pulled a knife - but do have ANY witnesses to that effect? I asked that question and you didn't answer. Was there anyone else in the restaurant? If not it pretty much comes down to your word against his - and I would definitely believe him over you. Right now you are speaking of a criminal matter - which has a very high burden of proof - it must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

I have tremendous doubt about this, which is very reasonable, for the reasons I have already outlined.

On the other hand, when it comes to a civil case the burdens of proof are much lower, and as I pointed out, in a libel case - the burden of proof is actually reversed - you must prove your innocence.

It's not up to you whether you find yourself in court as the accused in a libel trial, with Sori as the plantiff - that's up to him, should he choose to bring forth charges of libel against you.

I won't be sitting on the sidelines, unaware of how this this turns out. I am obviously taking an active interest in this case, and would be more than pleased to testify in both civil and criminal court, though there hardly seems to be enough evidence here, for this matter to make it to a criminal trial.

I'll reserve any further comments for the courtoom, if and when any of these items go to trial. At least in court people have to be rational, and there won't be any "court jesters" like Jerrold to provide a false sense of comic relief.

See you in court?

Regards,
Dave

A man went to a brain store to get some brain to complete a study. He sees a sign remarking on the quality of professional brain offerred at this particular brain store. He begins to question the butcher about the cost of these brains.

"How much does it cost for engineer brain?"

"Three dollars an ounce."

"How much does it cost for programmer brain?"

"Four dollars an ounce."

"How much for lawyer brain?"

"$1,000 an ounce."

"Why is lawyer brain so much more?"

"Do you know how many lawyers we had to round up to get one ounce of brain?!"

OMGWTFCOURTJESTER! ;)

As both Sori and I are more interested in truth, then legal proceedings I have decided to post some additional comments, as I had the chance to chat today with Sori. Nevertheless if legal proceedings are required to demonstrate the truth, such proceedings will continue.

I learned that there are in fact witnesses to the event, who came immediately after the incident to profess their willingness to testify against Carolina and her wife. Sori's strength of character is widely known and admired by his former patrons, the majority of which I suspect are also strong supporters of LGBT rights. Carolina definitely picked the wrong victim to give credibility to her scam.

According to Sori and witnesses, Carolina intentionally provoked a confrontation, apparently as a pretense, and excuse to cry "discrimination", an utterly false, completely unfounded allegation.

Witnesses observed Carolina and her wife return to Zytoon, a second time, and begin to systematically ransack the restaurant, throwing items from the counter on to the floor. Sori did not confront them in any physical way.

Tanja - that recent "alleged" insertion of yours, followed up with the proclomation that Carolina is "brave", and that victims should hot be "harrased" - clearly inferring that Carolina is the victim? It does nothing to help you legally, in fact, as a new posting, which also libels Sori, you have now committed two counts of libel - each which carries its own penalty. Legally speaking, you have now actually made things worse for yourself.

What about the rights of the falsely accused against a manipulative, calculating, vindictive, dishonest, sociopathic queer with anger management issues? Is this really the type of individual you want to spend your personal capital on, and that the LGBT wants to embrace?

Open your mind and think this through - as an editor that's a key responsibility. Just like with straight people, there are some very bad queer people.

Carelessly jumping to conclusions and choosing to side with Carolina's obvious lies, depsite what should be your better judgement, not only presents legal liability issues, but perhaps more sadly, greatly damages your credibility, and to some extent, that of the LGBT community in general, which could be used to help real victims of discrimination.

What's most unfortunate is that you, myself, and even Sori, believe strongly in defending those who are legitimate victims of homophobic discrimination. Ironic isn't it? And yet - one very bad apple has stirred the pot, in a way that is distinctly unhelpful to this cause.

Tanja, and others, it's time to realise that just because someone comes up with a fantastic story of homophobic discrimination, does not make it automatically true.

This has been for the Toronto LGBT community, a very sad occurence - the proper justice would be for that community to take action against one of its own, who has placed such a black mark upon the community.

Many heterosexuals, myself included, have been only too willing to come to the defence of queers that are being persecuted by other heterosexuals, sometimes at significant personal cost to ourselves. Should the queer community not come together, to the defence of a heterosexual being persecuted by a queer?

As you know, Sori will be pursuing this legally - but as typical of Sori, and in complete contrast to Carolina, its more important to him that truth prevail, than to win a large settlement, of which he is no doubt able to do.

What's interesting about this is Dave's weird, clipped way of writing and his connection to Sori.

Weirdness.