Tash Peterson: Vegan activist doesn’t care about consequences of actions because she ‘lives in a bubble’

Tash Peterson does not care about the devastating effects her actions have had on the owners of a Perth veterinary clinic because she “lives in a bubble” of her own views and sees herself as a crusader for animal rights. The militant vegan is also someone who repeatedly stages controversial protests at businesses and films them to post on her social media accounts, then uses so-called “thirst traps” to help generate further traffic for her page on the risque website OnlyFans. That was how Martin Bennett, the lawyer representing vet Dr Kay McIntosh and her husband Andrew, described Ms Peterson in his summation of their defamation case against her. The McIntoshs are suing Ms Peterson, her boyfriend, Jack Higgs and her company, V-Gan Booty, over a video she posted on her Facebook page in September 2021. In the video, which is still on Ms Peterson’s social media account, she accuses the clinic of promoting “animal slavery” and using two cockatiels as advertising props because they were outside the clinic in a cage. She also accused Dr McIntosh of being an “animal abuser” who “eats her own patients”. The court was told that the video has been viewed more than 70,000 times and shared both across Australia and overseas. Other videos Ms Peterson made around the same time period, such as her topless protest at a Nike store, only garnered a relatively small 16,000 views. Mr Bennett told Chief Justice Peter Quinlan that Ms Peterson not only planned the confrontation and secretly filmed it, but she also posted the video on her Facebook page out of “spite and anger” because she was asked to leave after being recognised by the owners. He said the outspoken vegan doesn’t care if she ruins a children’s birthday party, a marriage — the court was told the McIntoshs’ relationship was on the rocks as a result of the post — or exposes kids to nudity because she thinks she is teaching people a lesson through her “disruptive outreaching”. “She is unapologetic for what she has done,” Mr Bennett added. Ms Peterson’s lawyer, Jason MacLaurin, argued his client did not defame the McIntosh’s when she labelled them “animal abusers” who “eat their own patients” because no ordinary member of the community would believe what she said was true because her views are so extreme. He also told Justice Quinlan when you look at the video what was said was “clearly opinion” and that most people would recognise what Ms Peterson said was just her opinion and that the majority of the public disagree with her. Earlier, Mr MacLaurin asked that the McIntoshs withdraw the suggestion that Ms Peterson had been dishonest in her tax affairs after a document was produced on Thursday showing that her company, V-Gan Booty, did submit a tax return for the 2021-2022 financial year. Earlier this week, the court was told Ms Peterson earned more than $400,000 at the end of the 2022 financial year — most of which came from OnlyFans — but only declared $70,000 in business earnings to the Australian Tax Office. Mr Bennett told Justice Quinlan on Friday that the plaintiffs no longer have a basis for that proposition, and it would not form part of his closing submissions this afternoon. Justice Quinlan said that, from what he understood from Mr Bennett’s submission, claims that Ms Peterson was dishonest in her tax affairs formed no part of its case and reserved his decision in the matter.