Are the pack hunters of the Australian media-political left about to get their own taste of the Kyle Rittenhouse/Covington Kids medicine? For months, the pack have been howling for the blood of Bruce Lehrmann and, by proxy, the Coalition. For nearly two years, they’ve had an unchallenged run.
Suddenly, the roles have been reversed. With all charges against him dropped, Lehrmann is coming out, gunning for those who’ve relentlessly smeared and vilified him.
Bruce Lehrmann is contemplating suing the ABC over its decision to live broadcast a statement made by Brittany Higgins outside court after the first trial was aborted.
Lehrmann has been widely reported to be considering “legal remedies”, including an unfair dismissal claim and defamation, after prosecutors decided not to proceed with a retrial due to fears about its impact on Higgins.
The Guardian
The Guardian
The basis of the possible action is the ABC’s decision to broadcast, live and in full, accuser Britanny Higgins’ statement outside the courtroom after the collapse of the first trial. Given that it was still a live legal matter (Higgins may be referred for contempt of court), most media outlets only ran cautious excerpts — the ABC broadcast the statement in full, live to air.
But it’s not just the ABC in Lehrmann’s sights.
Bruce Lehrmann is considering suing Lisa Wilkinson and Channel 10 for defamation over the TV star’s Logie-award winning interview where Brittany Higgins first accused him of rape.
Although Lehrmann was not named, it wasn’t hard to find his name being bandied about in gossip circles. Once actual charges were made public, then the case was that the program uncritically broadcast material naming him as a “rapist”. Lehrmann will also apparently argue that he was denied a right of reply.
Meanwhile, sources with knowledge of Mr Lehrmann’s situation said he has no plans to change his name or leave the country, despite speculation, and that he was determined to clear his name.
Daily Mail
Daily Mail
For her part, Higgins is bandying lawsuits around, as well.
Ms Higgins has this week launched civil cases against the Commonwealth and her former bosses Senator Linda Reynolds and Senator Michaelia Cash.
Her lawyers have sent documents to all parties setting out an intention to sue for sexual harassment, sex discrimination, disability discrimination, negligence, and victimisation.
She will claim $2.5million for future economic loss, up to $100,000 for past economic loss $100,000 for general damages, $20,0000 for future assistance with domestic duties and $150,000 for past and future out-of-pocket expenses.
But the fallout from the sordid affair is threatening to spill even further over, with calls for the ACT lead prosecutor to resign.
Leading Canberra lawyer Peter Woodhouse, the managing partner of Aulich lawyers, accused ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold SC on Tuesday of pursuing charges related to the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins for ‘media attention’.
Mr Lehrmann has continuously and strenuously denied the allegations he raped Ms Higgins in Parliament House in 2019.
ACT police advised the DPP not to proceed with charges, for lack of evidence.
Mr Woodhouse told The Australian the commission ‘needs to explore whether Mr Drumgold let his own thirst for media attention or own political affiliations cloud what is supposed to be his independent judgment in such matters’.
Mr Woodhouse’s comments come as claims of political influence were revealed.
Daily Mail
Daily Mail
Other critics are questioning Drumgold’s conduct in consistently championing Higgins and his apparent “aim… to protect Higgins from further public scrutiny”.
Remember, Higgins could have proceeded with this trial minus the media attention. She has been subjected to public scrutiny because she chose to go to the media before she gave police a formal record of interview. She chose to give evidence in court rather than in a remote witness room. Higgins courted publicity before the trial started, during the trial, and on the day the trial was aborted and since then […]
One would have thought that an impartial prosecutor, mindful of the presumption of innocence, would at least have sought the same solicitude for Lehrmann, who also has suffered enormously throughout this ordeal. Where was Drumgold’s plea for attacks on Lehrmann to be brought to an end?
If a DPP, as an officer of the court, does not defend the presumption of innocence, especially when they choose not to re-prosecute a defendant, how can we expect others, who are not legally trained, to understand that our criminal justice system is the last bulwark against injustices in our society?
The Australian
The Australian
One thing only is certain about this whole affair — it’s far from over.
