Vancouver — One of several individuals accused of defaming former University of British Columbia professor Steven Galloway has issued a public apology just days before a high-profile defamation trial is set to commence in British Columbia Supreme Court.
Chelsea Rooney, a novelist and former acquaintance of Galloway, acknowledged in a statement published in the National Post that her actions caused “serious and harmful” damage to his reputation. The apology, also posted on gallowayapologies.com alongside eight other similar statements, represents a significant development in a case that has spanned more than a decade.
A Decade-Old Controversy
The legal battle stems from allegations made against Galloway in November 2015, when he was accused of sexual assault by a student identified only as A.B. Though Galloway was never criminally charged, he was dismissed from his position at UBC, where he served as chair of the creative writing programme and was the author of internationally recognised novels including “The Cellist of Sarajevo” and “The Confabulist.”
A university-commissioned investigation led by retired B.C. Supreme Court judge Mary Ellen Boyd concluded that the claims against Galloway were unsubstantiated. Despite this finding, the allegations continued to circulate widely, prompting Galloway to file a defamation lawsuit in 2018 against numerous individuals, including fellow academics and former students.
The case reached the Supreme Court of Canada in 2024, which ultimately dismissed an appeal by Galloway’s accusers, clearing the path for the upcoming trial scheduled to begin Monday.
Rooney’s Statement of Regret
In her apology, Rooney expressed deep remorse for her role in spreading what she now acknowledges were unproven allegations. “I recognise that statements and communications about allegations of this nature can cause profound harm to a person’s reputation, work, personal life, and family,” she wrote.
Rooney specifically addressed her involvement in collecting complaints and communicating them publicly, stating: “I should not have listened only to one side, or allowed that one-sided understanding to shape my communications, my tweets, or my participation in the process.”
She reflected on her past relationship with Galloway, noting that he had been supportive of her writing career long before the allegations emerged. “In my 2014 book, I thanked him as someone ‘who encouraged me to commit to writing at a very important time in my life.’ That was a true statement,” Rooney wrote.
Legal Precedent at Stake
The case has raised complex questions about free speech, defamation law, and the responsibilities of individuals who share allegations—particularly those involving serious criminal accusations—on social media and other public platforms.
Rooney and other defendants had argued that accusations of sexual assault should be protected speech regardless of their veracity or the context in which they were shared. However, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Elaine Adair rejected this argument in her 2021 ruling, stating that such a position would leave “no legal consequences of any kind” for publicly labelling someone a rapist.
“It is difficult to see how something so extreme and potentially reckless would be in the public interest,” Justice Adair wrote in her decision.
Galloway’s lawyer, Dan Burnett, previously commented that his client’s “reputation and life were devastated by the criminal allegations,” though he was unavailable for immediate comment regarding Rooney’s latest statement.
Broader Implications for Public Discourse
The timing of Rooney’s apology—mere days before the trial begins—suggests a potential shift in the dynamics of the case. Legal experts note that pre-trial apologies can significantly influence proceedings, particularly in defamation cases where public perception plays a crucial role.
The broader conversation around accountability in social media discourse has evolved considerably since 2015. While advocacy for survivors of sexual violence remains critically important, the Galloway case highlights the delicate balance between supporting complainants and protecting individuals from unfounded accusations that can destroy lives and careers.
Roooney concluded her statement with a recognition of the irreparable nature of the harm caused: “I know that nothing I say now can undo the harm or give back the years affected by these events, but I am genuinely sorry for the part I played in causing that harm.”
Why it Matters
This case sits at the intersection of two vital societal concerns: the imperative to believe and support survivors of sexual violence, and the fundamental right to due process and protection from defamation. As digital communication accelerates the spread of unverified allegations, the Galloway trial will establish important precedents for how Canadian courts navigate these competing interests. The outcome will likely influence not only how institutions handle similar accusations but also how individuals understand their responsibilities when sharing sensitive information in public forums. For survivors’ advocates, the case underscores the need for robust support systems that don’t rely on public shaming. For civil liberties defenders, it reinforces the principle that accusations—however credible—must be tested through proper legal channels rather than social media campaigns. As our society continues grappling with these tensions, this trial represents a crucial moment for clarifying the boundaries of public discourse in the digital age.