Bruce Lehrmann has lost his defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson, after Justice Michael Lee delivered his verdict in the civil trial at Federal Court.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 I'm comfortably satisfied that Ms Higgins was a very drunk 24 year old woman and her cognitive abilities were significantly impacted.
00:07 Given this state in the late hour it is highly likely she was prone to drowsiness.
00:11 This is strongly supported by the fact, as Ms Higgins put it in his final submissions, that she "passed out naked in the minister's suite"
00:19 and my findings she was still very significantly affected two hours after she was left alone.
00:25 Further, in the light of my findings as to Mr Lerman's conduct I am also satisfied he was aware of her condition.
00:32 Given the evidence I have already discussed and the weight I place on contemporaneous representations
00:38 I have not reached the level of satisfaction that during the sexual act Ms Higgins said "no" in a loop
00:43 and I think it's more likely than not that she did not or was not able to articulate anything.
00:48 On balance I think it's more likely than not that she was passive, as she later said, like a log during the entirety of the sexual act.
00:55 I am further satisfied that she felt unable to get out from the couch immediately following Mr Lerman leaving
01:01 and she then passed into a deep sleep.
01:03 The fact she "passed out" at some time is common ground in final submissions.
01:09 The approach taken by Network 10 was then carefully considered and resulted in a letter being sent to her Honours Associate
01:15 which although using words such as "profound regret" and "apology"
01:21 when closely parsed is directed to "at regret" for the consequences that ensued and not the fact the speech was given.
01:29 According to Ms Smithies it amounted to an apology for things for which Network 10 bore no responsibility.
01:35 It was not disclosed to the Chief Justice that Ms Wilkinson gave the speech based on considered advice
01:40 nor was it given for the specific purpose now explained by Ms Smithies
01:45 and that Network 10's Chief Litigation Counsel continued to stand by the appropriateness of the giving and content of the speech.
01:51 The conduct of Network 10 through its employees in procuring Ms Wilkinson to give the speech in the form it was given
01:57 for the reasons it was given was grossly improper and unjustifiable.
02:01 It was conduct apt to cause disruption of the criminal justice system
02:05 and without the Chief Justice making the orders she did could have imperiled Mr Lerman's right to a fair trial.
02:11 Mr Lerman is not entitled to the vindication of his reputation.
02:15 The respondents however are entitled to vindication by the entry of judgment on the statement of the moment.
02:21 But even though the respondents have legally justified their imputation of rape
02:26 this does not mean that their conduct was justified in any broader or colloquial sense.
02:30 The contemporaneous documents in the broadcast itself demonstrate the allegation of rape was a minor theme
02:36 and the allegation of cover-up was the major motif.
02:39 The publication of accusations of corrupt conduct in putting up roadblocks
02:43 and forcing a rape victim to choose between her career and justice may have won the project team like Ms Maynard a glittering prize.
02:50 But when the accusation is examined properly it was supposition without reasonable foundation and verifiable fact.
02:56 Its dissemination caused a broom of confusion and it did much collateral damage
03:01 including to the fair and orderly progress of the underlying allegation of sexual assault through the criminal justice system.
03:07 I will direct an outline of submissions on costs to be filed
03:10 and then we'll list the matter to hear and determine all outstanding issues
03:13 including the residual issues arising on the cost claim.
03:17 And I make the following orders.
03:22 One, judgement for the respondents on the statement of claim.
03:27 Two, the parties file submissions as to the cost order for which they contend
03:32 and any evidence they rely upon in relation to costs on or by 22 April 2024.
03:39 I publish my reasons. Adjourn the court.
03:42 [End of Audio]