When Brittany Higgins, her partner David Sharaz, Lisa Wilkinson and producer Angus Llewellyn met in a Sydney hotel room, their conversation turned to the possibility of Bruce Lehrmann one day launching defamation proceedings.
There, in a five-word declaration that could soon come back to bite her, Ms Higgins said if Mr Lehrmann wanted to “go after” her on a civil basis: “I think I could win”.
It was January 27, 2021 and the four were holding a pre-production meeting to discuss Ms Higgins’ allegations ahead of a planned story on The Project in the coming weeks.
They discussed whether Mr Lehrmann would be named in any broadcast and the prospect of him being identified.
“When it comes to defamation,” Mr Llewellyn said, according to a transcript of the conversation released by the Federal Court.
“His reputation is clearly going to be lowered by being called a rapist. And whether people could identify him by the story.”
It was eight months before Mr Lehrmann was charged and well over a year before his trial in the ACT Supreme Court collapsed due to juror misconduct.
“I would love to have the court case on civil,” Ms Higgins said in somewhat prescient comments.
“If he wants to go after me, like on a civil basis, I think, on the balance of probabilities, I think I could win.
“I think, if the onus of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, I think that would be different. I don’t think I could win that.”
Ms Higgins was referring to the onus of proof in different courts - in a criminal trial an allegation must be proven by the prosecution “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
While civil matters - including defamation - are decided “on the balance of probabilities”.
In December last year, the Director of Public Prosecutions elected not to pursue a re-trial, because of concerns about Ms Higgins’ health.
No findings have ever been made against him and he launched a defamation lawsuit against Ms Wilkinson and Network 10 over Ms Higgins’ interview on The Project.
Over the last five weeks, the defamation trial has played out in the Federal Court, with Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins, their friends, family and colleagues, as well as Ms Wilkinson and others who worked on the story, giving their versions of events.
Justice Michael Lee is expected to hand down his judgment at some point next year.
The bruise photo and the metadata
Central to the case is what happened behind closed doors, in the office of Senator Linda Reynolds, then the Defence Industries Minister in the Morrison government, in the early hours of March 23, 2019.
It is known that Ms Higgins, Mr Lehrmann and other Liberal staffers met at a Canberra bar, The Dock, earlier that evening.
Ms Higgins met a Bumble date, however CCTV captured him leaving several hours later after she went and sat at another table.
Afterwards, Ms Higgins, Mr Lehrmann, along with Liberal staffers Lauren Gain and Austin Wenke, moved to another bar 88MPH, before they later travelled back to Parliament House.
According to Ms Higgins’ version of events, she woke up on a couch in the minister’s suite while being raped by her colleague.
Mr Lehrmann told the court that when he entered the office, he went left towards his desk and Ms Higgins went right towards the minister’s suite.
According to Mr Lehrmann, he never had any sexual contact with her that night.
She was found on the couch naked the following morning.
Ms Higgins says that in an attempt to corroborate her allegation, she took a photo of a bruise on her thigh a week later.
During Mr Lehrmann’s criminal trial, she claimed the bruise was suffered during the alleged rape - and she made a similar claim to The Project.
She accepted during her evidence to the Federal Court that the bruise may have in fact been caused when she fell up the stairs at 88MPH.
“At the time I believed it had been caused by the assault but with hindsight and … in the criminal trial, it was put to me it was possible it came from another source,” Ms Higgins said.
“So I’ve now had to accept it may not have come from the assault itself.”
Under claims that she was shifting her narrative as she learned more information, Ms Higgins said she was honest but mistaken.
The photo was later provided to The Project after Ms Higgins airdropped it to Mr Llewellyn.
She later provided a statutory declaration to The Project that she suffered the bruise during the alleged sexual assault.
And while Ms Higgins claimed it was taken in April, 2019, metadata from the picture stated it had been created on January 27, 2021 - the day she first met with Ms Wilkinson and Mr Llewellyn at a Sydney hotel.
According to Ms Higgins, instead of sending Mr Llewellyn the original photo, she took a screenshot, which she then forwarded to him.
By sending the copy, the metadata - which would have established when it was taken - was wiped.
As well, the court heard that in the pre-interview, Ms Higgins claimed that her phone had “completely died” after she took screenshots of messages with Linda Reynolds and Michaelia Cash and had asked Ms Reynolds’ office for a former colleague’s phone number.
During the pre-interview discussion, Ms Higgins said: “I know they can remote wipe phones, I know that’s not unheard of.”
Ms Wilkinson later texted Mr Llewellyn about what she saw as inconsistencies in her statement that she retained the bruise photo and that her phone had been wiped.
“I want to zero in on this whole phone thing,” Ms Wilkinson wrote in a text message, the court heard.
Ms Wilkinson further said: “If she believes she took screenshots of crucial messages she no longer has, how come she still has the bruise shot?
“I’m confused on this point.”
Ms Wilkinson said it raised “alarm bells” and asked Mr Llewellyn to raise the issue with Ms Higgins.
“I want to suggest to you at this point you believed this issue presented a potential significant credibility issue for your source,” Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson asked.
“Correct,” Ms Wilkinson said.
The lip reader
During his testimony, Mr Lehrmann was asked a series of questions by Network 10’s barrister Dr Matt Collins KC, about his interactions with Ms Higgins at The Dock bar on the evening of March 22, 2019.
Dr Collins suggested to Mr Lehrmann that he had encouraged Ms Higgins to drink quickly.
The court was played footage of Ms Higgins skolling a drink late in the evening, before the group later moved to 88MPH.
Dr Collins: “You said to her ‘drink that all now’,”
Mr Lehrmann: “I would completely disagree with that.”
Dr Collins: “She responded ‘I don’t want to’.”
Mr Lehrmann: “I don’t recall that ever taking place.”
Dr Collins: “You said ‘drink it all, you can’t leave that, come on, you’re not leaving that’.”
Mr Lehrman: “I disagree.”
Dr Collins: “At that point she skolled the drink while you watched on.”
Mr Lehrmann: “No I disagree.”
Network 10 called forensic lip-reader Tim Reedy to give evidence after asking him to prepare a report about what he asserts was said between Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann, based on his viewing of The Dock CCTV.
The court was told that Mr Reedy was profoundly deaf, was a self-taught lip-reader and needed the assistance of a lip-speaker to give evidence to the court.
Mr Lehrmann’s legal team objected to his report being allowed into evidence arguing that lipreading is not an exact science, Mr Reedy’s opinions about what was said cannot be objectively tested and it was his first time giving evidence to a court.
Justice Michael Lee allowed Mr Reedy’s evidence to be tendered, but noted he would take into account the objections of Mr Lehrmann’s barrister, Steve Whybrow SC.
The court heard that in his report, Mr Reedy remarked about a piece of footage: “Man is lining up drinks, plying the woman with alcohol.”
Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steve Whybrow SC questioned whether that assessment had coloured Mr Reedy’s assertions about what was said on the CCTV.
“How did you come to write that note?” Mr Whybrow asked.
“Because this was a party and everyone’s having fun,” said Mr Reedy, who flew from London to Sydney to give evidence.
“What stuck out was Ms Higgins was drinking and she’s literally in the corner of a table, and there are some drinks there, on the table and they are pushed in her direction.
“And this suggests she had been plied by alcohol.”
The court heard that in his report, Mr Reedy asserted that at one point Mr Lehrmann said “drink that all now” and Ms Higgins replied “I don’t want to”.
“Would you accept that in the circumstances where you have never been assessed as to the accuracy of your lip-reading, that some of your opinions might not be correct,” Mr Whybrow said.
“I would say that they’re more correct than not,” Mr Reedy said.
‘Pashed’
Several witnesses were called during the trial, including Ms Gain and Mr Wenke, about what they saw while at 88MPH after the group moved there from The Dock.
Mr Lehrmann denied seeing Ms Higgins fall over and helping her back onto a couch.
He further denied touching Ms Higgins on the leg and thigh, putting his arm around her and later kissing her.
“You pashed Ms Higgins while sitting in a booth at 88MPH between about midnight and 1.30am,” Dr Collins asked
“I did not,” Mr Lehrmann said.
Mr Lehrmann, during his evidence, further denied touching her or having any sort of intimate contact with her.
Dr Collins: “You deny putting your arm around her?”
Mr Lehrmann: “Yes.”
Dr Collins: “You deny kissing her?”
Mr Lehrmann: “Yes.”
Ms Gain, during her evidence, told the court that she saw Ms Higgins fall over at 88MPH and Mr Lehrmann helped her back to her feet.
“I remember Brittany and Bruce sitting quite close together, I remember them being quite touchy with one another, I remember them kissing and I remember her taking selfies of the two of them,” Ms Gain told the court.
Ms Gain added that she saw Mr Lehrmann placing his hands on Ms Higgins’ thigh and Ms Higgins placing her hand on Mr Lehrmann’s thigh.
Asked to describe the kiss, Ms Gain said: “It was a real kiss … It went for a period of time, so it wasn’t a peck, it was very much a kiss kiss.”
“I take it was a passionate kiss?” Justice Lee asked.
“Yes, Ms Gain said.
During his evidence, Mr Lehrmann accused Ms Gain of having given incorrect evidence at his criminal trial where she gave a similar version of events
“You accused Ms Gain of having fabricated evidence that she relayed at your criminal trial in order to discredit you,” Dr Collins asked.
“I believe she did,” Mr Lehrmann said.
TheFinoa Brown meeting
The court heard that Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann both went to work on the following Monday and Tuesday.
The court heard that he received an email from Ms Higgins on the Monday which stated: “Hi Bruce, I’m phoning a friend,” she wrote.
“Need some help with the task Drew sent me. I’m hoping to utilise your parliamentary network to get portfolio stats from whichever offices you can.
The following day, Mr Lehrmann was dismissed from Senator Reynolds’ office for entering Parliament House after hours.
Ms Higgins says that in that office she told Ms Brown: “I said I was drunk, I said he was on top of me”.
However, that claim was denied by Ms Brown in her evidence.
When she was asked whether Ms Higgins said “Bruce was on top of me” and she replied “Oh God”, Ms Brown replied “no” and “nope”.
Ms Brown said she was told: “I’m responsible for what I drink and my actions”.
Ms Brown told the court that Ms Higgins made no sexual assault allegation in their meeting on Tuesday, March 26.
However she said that at a subsequent meeting two days later, Ms Higgins said she “remembered” him being “on top” of her.
“She pivoted, she was quite casual, she just said out of the blue ‘I remember him on top of me’,” Ms Brown said.
https://news.google.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?oc=5
2023-12-22 20:33:52Z
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
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Six words that could bite Higgins - news.com.au"
Post a Comment