Search

Placeholder Content Image

Former pilot accused of murder shares his version of events

<p>Former Jetstar pilot Greg Lynn has shared his version of events from the day Russell Hill and Carol Clay were allegedly murdered. </p> <p>Mr Lynn, who is on trial for the murders of the elderly campers, claimed Mr Hill, 74, knifed himself in a struggle after he accidentally shot his childhood sweetheart Ms Clay, 73, in the head.</p> <p>Police allege Mr Hill and Ms Clay were murdered while camping in the remote Wonnangatta Valley in Victoria's Alpine region more than four years ago, with Crown prosecutor Daniel Porceddu telling the jury at the opening of the trial exactly how and why Lynn allegedly killed the couple.</p> <p>"The precise circumstances of the killing are unknown, nor is the motivation," he said.  </p> <p>The jury heard it was most likely a dispute over the use Mr Hill's drone, as Mr Porceddu said, "There might have been an argument or confrontation between the men. It is not known how Mr Hill was killed."</p> <p>But in providing a brief defence, Lynn's barrister Dermot Dann KC, claimed Mr Hill and Ms Clay's death was the result of a tragic accident, telling the jury, "We say not a case of murder, this is a case of two accidental, tragic deaths."</p> <p>"Tragic accidental deaths in circumstances that were not of Mr Lynn's making and not of his choosing."</p> <p>Mr Dann told the jury that Mr Hill allegedly stole Lynn's shotgun after he became enraged about Lynn playing loud music on the night he was killed. </p> <p>The barrister then detailed how a fight over the gun ensued, which resulted in Mr Hill accidentally shooting Ms Clay in the head, as Mr Lynn tried to disarm him. </p> <p>Mr Dann said Lynn picked up the gun and fired its remaining ammunition into the air before being set upon by an enraged Mr Hill. </p> <p>"The next thing is Mr Hill's advancing towards him with a knife screaming at him 'she's dead'," Mr Dann said. </p> <p>"A struggle developed over the knife. Mr Lynn trying to defend himself - they're locked in this struggle - and as part of that struggle the two men fall to the ground  and the knife goes through the chest of Mr Hill."</p> <p>Upon his arrest, Mr Dann claimed Lynn co-operated with detectives, telling them where to find the bodies of the campers, and once again telling the jury that Mr Lynn is not guilty of murder or manslaughter.</p> <p class="mol-para-with-font" style="margin: 0px 0px 16px; padding: 0px; min-height: 0px;"><em>Image credits: Supplied / Facebook </em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Bombshell allegations in murder case of young school girl

<p>The man accused of murdering nine-year-old Charlise Mutten has claimed her mother was the one to pull the trigger. </p> <p>Justin Stein, 33, is facing trial for allegedly murdering Charlise in January 2022 at Mount Wilson, in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney.</p> <p>Nine-year-old Charlise was shot once in the head and once in the back, with her body recovered from a barrel dumped near the Colo River, four days after she was reported missing by her mother.</p> <p>On Monday, Stein formally pleaded not guilty to the charges, and has now alleged it was actually Charlise's mother who killed her and helped stuff her body in a barrel before lying to police. </p> <p>The court heard that Stein was in a relationship with Charlise's mother Kallista Mutten, as the pair met while both serving jail sentences. </p> <p>Both parties struggled with substance abuse, as Kallista had been using ice since she was in her early 20s, while Justin had been undergoing treatment for heroin addiction. </p> <p>Before the alleged murder, Stein and Kallista broke into a neighbour’s home near the Mount Wilson property, taking two firearms, crown prosecutor Ken McKay SC told the jury.</p> <p>Stein initially told police the girl may have been taken by unknown persons, but later told a corrections officer Kallista had shot and killed her daughter and that he had helped dispose of the body.</p> <p>According to Stein’s lawyer, Carolyn Davenport SC, Stein had been inside a shed on the Blue Mountains property when he heard a gunshot, and had gone outside to see Kallista shooting her daughter a second time.</p> <p>At the time of her death, Charlise was living with her grandparents at Tweed Heads, and had flown to Sydney on December 21st with plans to spend Christmas and New Year’s Eve with her mother and Stein.</p> <p><em>Image credits: ABC / NSW Police </em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Brutal cost of Bruce Lehrmann’s failed defamation case

<p>Bruce Lehrmann has been ordered to pay the majority of Network Ten's multi-million dollar legal fees after his failed defamation case. </p> <p>In April, Lehrmann faced a huge loss after the Federal Court found an allegation that he raped Brittany Higgins in a Parliament House office in March 2019 was most likely true, therefore is unable to be defamed for the allegations. </p> <p>The 28-year-old had sued Network Ten for defamation over a February 2021 report on <em>The Project</em>, in which journalist Lisa Wilkinson interviewed Higgins over the rape allegation.</p> <p>Since the defamation case drew to a close, the parties have been in dispute over the legal costs and who should foot what is expected to amount to a sizeable legal bill for the long-running and high-profile case.</p> <p>On Friday afternoon, Justice Michael Lee found in favour of Ten's application for indemnity costs for most of the trial, as Lehrmann is now ordered to pay for the network's and Wilkinson's costs on an ordinary and indemnity basis, but he will not have to pay costs for some affidavits.</p> <p>"In the end, it comes down to the order for costs that best does overall justice in the circumstances," Lee told the court.</p> <p>"On balance, the appropriate exercise of discretion is to make an award that Network Ten recover its costs against Mr Lehrmann on an indemnity basis, except for costs incurred in relation to the statutory qualified privilege defence."</p> <p>In explaining his decision, the judge said he found Lehrmann had defended the criminal charge "on a false basis, lied to police, and then allowed that lie to go uncorrected before the jury".</p> <p>"He wrongly instructed his senior counsel to cross-examine a complainant of sexual assault, in two legal proceedings, including, relevantly for present purposes, this case, on a knowingly false premise," he said.</p> <p>Earlier in the week, the court heard Lehrmann had no financial backers and that his lawyers had agreed they did not need to be paid if he lost the case.</p> <p>The total amount he will have to pay will be determined at a hearing later in May.</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images </em></p> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 18px; line-height: 24px; color: #333333; caret-color: #333333; font-family: 'Proxima Nova', system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol';"> </p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Judge finds Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins and dismisses Network 10 defamation case. How did it play out?

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/brendan-clift-715691">Brendan Clift</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a></em></p> <p>Bruce Lehrmann has lost his defamation suit against Channel Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson after the media defendants proved, on the balance of probabilities, that Lehrmann raped his colleague Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019.</p> <p>After a trial lasting around a month, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee – an experienced defamation judge – concluded that both Lehrmann and Higgins had credibility issues, but ultimately <a href="https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2024/2024fca0369">he was persuaded</a> that Lehrmann raped Higgins, as she’d alleged and he’d denied.</p> <h2>Criminal trials by proxy</h2> <p>Ordinarily, charges like rape would be resolved through the criminal courts, but Lehrmann’s criminal trial was <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-27/jury-discharged-in-trial-of-bruce-lehrmann-brittany-higgins/101583486">aborted</a> in October 2022 after juror misconduct. The charges against him were soon <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/bruce-lehrmann-sexual-assault-charge-dropped-dpp-confirms/news-story/3f82dd388d2cfa38680f7d4f4ceb1c5e">dropped</a>, nominally over concerns for Higgins’ mental health.</p> <p>Higgins, however, foresaw civil proceedings and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/05/brittany-higgins-volunteered-to-be-defamation-trial-witness-as-she-would-not-let-rapist-become-a-millionaire-ntwnfb">offered to testify</a> should they arise. That they did, as Lehrmann, free from the burden of any proven crime, sued several media outlets for defamation over their reporting into the allegations (<a href="https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services/access-to-files-and-transcripts/online-files/lehrmann">the ABC</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/06/abc-agrees-to-pay-bruce-lehrmann-150000-to-settle-defamation-claim-court-documents-reveal">News Corp</a> both settled out of court).</p> <p><iframe class="flourish-embed-iframe" style="width: 100%; height: 550px;" title="Interactive or visual content" src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/17195035/embed" width="100%" height="400" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe></p> <div style="width: 100%!; margin-top: 4px!important; text-align: right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/17195035/?utm_source=embed&amp;utm_campaign=visualisation/17195035" target="_top"><img src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg" alt="Made with Flourish" /></a></div> <p>Like Ben Roberts-Smith’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/dismissed-legal-experts-explain-the-judgment-in-the-ben-roberts-smith-defamation-case-191503">recent defamation suit</a> against the former Fairfax papers, this became another case of civil proceedings testing grave allegations in the absence of a criminal law outcome.</p> <p>The form of proceedings made for some key differences with the aborted criminal trial. In criminal cases, prosecutors are ethically bound to act with moderation in pursuing a conviction, which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, while defendants have the right to silence. By contrast, this trial featured detailed accounts from both sides as each sought to convince, in essence, that their contentions were likely to be correct.</p> <p>Also like the Roberts-Smith case, live streaming of the trial generated very high levels of public engagement. Today’s stream reached audiences of more than 45,000 people. It gave us the chance to assess who and what we believe, and to scrutinise the parties’ claims and the media’s reporting. The Federal Court doesn’t have juries, but we, the public, acted as a de facto panel of peers.</p> <p>We saw accusations and denials, revealing <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-23/bruce-lehrmann-defamation-trial-network-ten-lisa-wilkinson-ends/103260752">cross-examination</a> of the protagonists, witness testimony from colleagues, CCTV footage from nightclubs to Parliament House complete with lip-reading, expert testimony on alcohol consumption and consent, and lawyers constructing timelines which supported or poked holes in competing versions of events.</p> <p>The complexity of high-stakes legal proceedings was on display, with Justice Lee issuing many interim decisions on questions of procedure and evidence. Whenever transparency was at stake, it won.</p> <p>The preference for full disclosure led to the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/law/2024/apr/02/bruce-lehrmann-defamation-trial-network-10-fresh-evidence-bid-lisa-wilkinson-brittany-higgins-delay-ntwnfb">case being re-opened</a> at the eleventh hour to call former Channel 7 producer Taylor Auerbach as a witness, providing a denouement that the judge called “sordid”, but which had little relevance to the final result.</p> <h2>An argument over the truth</h2> <p>Lehrmann had the burden of proving that the defendants published matter harmful to his reputation. That matter was Wilkinson’s interview with Higgins on Channel Ten’s The Project in which the allegations were made.</p> <p>A statement is only defamatory if it’s untrue, but in Australian law, the publisher bears the burden of proving truth, should they opt for that defence. And more serious allegations usually require more compelling proof, as the law views them as inherently more unlikely.</p> <p>This can be onerous for a defamation defendant, but it also involves risk for the plaintiff, should the defendant embark on an odyssey of truth-telling yet more damaging to the plaintiff’s image. That happened to <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-65717684">Ben Roberts-Smith</a> and it happened to Lehrmann here.</p> <p>On the other hand, if the media hasn’t done their homework, as in <a href="https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2023/2023fca1223">Heston Russell’s case</a> against the ABC (also presided over by Justice Lee), the complainant can be vindicated.</p> <p>This case was a manifestation of Lehrmann’s professed desire to “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/26/how-bruce-lehrmanns-media-interviews-cost-him-his-anonymity-in-toowoomba-case">light some fires</a>”. Few players in this extended saga have emerged without scars, and here he burned his own fingers, badly.</p> <p>As Justice Lee put it, Lehrmann, “having escaped the lion’s den [of criminal prosecution], made the mistake of coming back to get his hat”.</p> <h2>How was the case decided?</h2> <p>Lehrmann denied having sex with Higgins, whereas Higgins alleged there had been non-consensual sex. The defamatory nature of the publication centred on the claim of rape, so that was what the media defendants sought to prove.</p> <p>This left open the curious possibility that consensual sex might have taken place: if so, Lehrmann would have brought his case on a false premise (there had been no sex), but the media would have failed to defend it (by not proving a lack of consent), resulting in a Lehrmann win.</p> <p>That awkward scenario did not arise. The court found sex did in fact take place, Higgins in her heavily-inebriated and barely-conscious state did not give consent, and Lehrmann was so intent on his gratification that he ignored the requirement of consent.</p> <p>Justice Lee found Lehrmann to be a persistent, self-interested liar, whereas Higgin’s credibility issues were of lesser degree, some symptomatic of a person piecing together a part-remembered trauma. The judge drew strongly on the evidence of certain neutral parties who could testify to incidents or words spoken in close proximity to the events.</p> <h2>Defamation laws favour the aggrieved</h2> <p>Australian defamation law has historically favoured plaintiffs and, despite recent <a href="https://www.ruleoflaw.org.au/civil/defamation/2021-law-reform/">rebalancing attempts</a>, it remains a favoured legal weapon for those with the resources to use it.</p> <p>This includes our political class, who sue their critics for defamation with unhealthy frequency for a democracy. In the United States, public figures don’t have it so easy: to win they must prove their critics were lying.</p> <p>In Australia, the media sometimes succeeds in proving truth, but contesting defamation proceedings comes at great financial cost and takes an emotional toll on the journalists involved.</p> <p>Nor can a true claim always be proven to a court’s satisfaction, given the rules of evidence and the fact that sources may be reluctant to testify or protected by a reporter’s guarantee of confidentiality.</p> <p>But this case demonstrates that publishers with an appetite for the legal fight can come out on top.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225891/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/brendan-clift-715691"><em>Brendan Clift</em></a><em>, Lecturer of law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images </em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/judge-finds-bruce-lehrmann-raped-brittany-higgins-and-dismisses-network-10-defamation-case-how-did-it-play-out-225891">original article</a>.</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Sam Kerr's alleged racial comments revealed by UK paper

<p>The legal controversy surrounding <span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;">Matildas star Sam Kerr </span><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;">following allegations of racially charged remarks directed towards a police officer in London continues to unfold, after a UK newspaper published those alleged remarks. </span></p> <p>According to <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/26401266/sam-kerr-football-charge-crime-police-fifa/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Sun</a>, Kerr allegedly called a police officer a "stupid white bastard" during a dispute over a taxi fare. The details emerged as Kerr faced charges for using insulting, threatening or abusive words towards the officer, causing alarm or distress. The seriousness of the allegations is underscored by the potential consequences, with Kerr facing a maximum sentence of two years' imprisonment if convicted.</p> <p>The incident is said to have taken place in January 2023 shortly after Kerr's remarkable performance in a Chelsea FA Cup victory, and Kerr has maintained her innocence, pleading not guilty to the charges brought against her.</p> <p>The delayed prosecution in Kerr's case has sparked speculation, with reports suggesting that determining the appropriate charge was a complex process for the Crown Prosecution Service. However, as the trial approaches, the focus shifts towards the legal proceedings and the evidence that will be presented in court.</p> <p>Throughout her career, Kerr has been a prominent figure in the fight against racism in sport. Her past actions, including posing with an Aboriginal flag alongside her Matildas teammates, reflect a commitment to promoting inclusivity and unity. Kerr's accolades both on and off the field have solidified her iconic status, making the allegations against her all the more surprising.</p> <p>In response to the controversy, Matildas coach Tony Gustavsson and Football Australia CEO James Johnson expressed their lack of prior knowledge regarding the incident. </p> <p>Prime Minister Anthony Albanese declined to comment directly on the matter, but said that Kerr's actions during her tenure as the national flag bearer exemplified pride and dignity. </p> <p>“I don’t comment on legal matters before Australian courts, let alone other ones,” Albanese said. “I will say this about my contact with Sam Kerr, she was our flag bearer at the coronation. My contact with her was exemplary. She did Australia proud at that time and I think that my contact with her has been nothing but delightful.”</p> <p><em>Images: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Matildas captain Sam Kerr to face criminal trial

<p>Matildas superstar Sam Kerr has found herself at the centre of legal proceedings in London, as she pled not guilty to charges stemming from an alleged incident involving a police officer earlier this year.</p> <p>Kerr, aged 30, appeared before Kingston Crown Court via videolink to contest accusations of using insulting, threatening or abusive language towards a police officer in Twickenham on January 30.</p> <p>During the hearing, Kerr confirmed her identity and entered a "not guilty" plea to the charge, which was later confirmed by the Metropolitan Police. The specifics of the charge were outlined in a police charge sheet, citing Kerr for a racially aggravated offence under Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986. The incident allegedly occurred during police intervention related to a complaint involving a taxi fare.</p> <p>The trial, slated to commence in February 2025, is expected to span four days, during which two police officers will provide evidence. Meanwhile, Football Australia (FA) has issued a statement acknowledging the legal proceedings involving Kerr, asserting their commitment to support all players both on and off the field. However, due to the ongoing legal nature of the situation, further comments were withheld.</p> <p>“Football Australia is aware of the legal proceedings involving Sam Kerr in the United Kingdom,” the statement read. “As this is an ongoing legal matter, we are unable to provide further comment at this time. Our focus remains on supporting all our players, both on and off the field. We will continue to monitor the situation and provide support as appropriate.”</p> <p>The announcement comes after Kerr's unfortunate sidelining from both club and international duties. Suffering an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury during Chelsea's warm-weather training camp in Morocco, Kerr faces a prolonged period of rehabilitation, ruling her out of action for the foreseeable future. Her absence from the Matildas' lineup is particularly sorely felt, with preparations for the Paris Olympics underway.</p> <p>Despite the setback, Football Australia has not officially ruled Kerr out of contention for the Olympics. However, the typical recovery timeline for ACL injuries suggests a lengthy rehabilitation process, casting doubts on Kerr's participation in the upcoming tournament scheduled to begin on July 26.</p> <p><em>Images: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Lip reader provides evidence against Bruce Lehrmann

<p>A lip-reading expert has provided key evidence in Bruce Lehrmann's defamation trial against Network Ten, revealing what he believes was said between Lehrmann and Brittany Higgins on the night of the alleged rape. </p> <p>British lip reader Tim Reedy, a forensic lip reader who has previously worked for <em>The Sunday Times</em> to translate video of Royals speaking at funerals and weddings, has been grilled after deciphering what was said between the pair at a pub in Canberra. </p> <p>Reedy, who became profoundly deaf as a child, claimed that Bruce Lehrmann told Brittany Higgins that several drinks on a table on the night of her alleged rape were “all hers, all hers”.</p> <p>He explained he was “very certain that this is what was said” and the phrases were “more than 50 per cent” accurate.</p> <p>Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steve Whybrow posed a series of questions over his claim that his client had said “Drink that all now”, and that Ms Higgins had said “I don’t want to”.</p> <p>“What I wanted to ask you, consistent with what you say in your appendix about how you go about lip reading, you took into account the context, which included your assessment that the man was plying her with drinks, is that correct?” Mr Whybrow asked.</p> <p>Reedy stood by his assessment, sharing that he  he had watched the video intently over a three-day period, saying he was able to use Apple technology to “fine tune” the images and had “the luxury” of going back and watching the footage repeatedly.</p> <p>At the conclusion of Mr Reedy’s evidence, Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steve Whybrow argued it should not be admitted as evidence.</p> <p>Justice Lee disagreed with Mr Whybrow, saying: “I accept that lip reading is not perfect, but the guide for the admissibility of expert evidence is not a council of perfection. One has to take areas of specialised knowledge as one finds them.”</p> <p>“I do not think I should exclude the evidence. But the matters raised by Mr Whybrow are best seen through the prism of the ultimate weight to be given to the material. Accordingly I accept the tender of the material.”</p> <p>In the opening days of the trial, Network Ten barrister Matt Collins KC flagged flagged the lip reader's evidence, as he put to Mr Lehrmann some of the lip-reader's claims during cross examination.</p> <p>“You said to her ‘Drink that all now’, Dr Collins suggested.</p> <p>“I would just completely disagree with that,’’ Mr Lehrmann replied.</p> <p>“She responded, ‘I don’t want to’?” Collins asked.</p> <p>“I don’t recall that ever taking place, no,’’ Mr Lehrmann said.</p> <p>“You were encouraging Ms Higgins to get drunk,” Ten’s barrister Matthew Collins KC said during cross-examination.</p> <p>“No,” Lehrmann replied.</p> <p><em>Image credits: 7 Spotlight / Getty Images</em></p> <div class="media image side-by-side" style="caret-color: #000000; color: #000000; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; box-sizing: inherit; margin-bottom: 24px; display: flex; flex-direction: column; align-items: center; width: 705.202209px; max-width: 100%;"> </div>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

"Very poor journalism": Lisa Wilkinson called out in defamation case

<p>Lisa Wilkinson has been forced to defend the journalistic decisions of <em>The Project</em>, as she took to the stand as part of Bruce Lehrmann's defamation case against Wilkinson and Channel Ten. </p> <p>During court proceedings on Friday, Wilkinson admitted that during her bombshell report on Brittany Higgins' rape allegations, the program left out key information. </p> <p><em>The Project</em> allegedly edited out important details about what happened in Parliament House the morning after Brittany Higgins was allegedly raped.</p> <div data-body-element-id="zjCMXjhzxa"> <p>In an uncut version of the episode which aired in February 2021, Wilkinson asked Ms Higgins if any security guards had asked if she was "okay" after the alleged incident.</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="R0B2D1Ni6K"> <p>Ms Higgins replied, "No, no. I mean, besides one who called into the office in the morning, and said ‘Is everyone okay?’ and that was it."</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="2D5V5jCZaQ"> <p>In the final cut, the words "...besides the one who called into the office in the morning" were not included.</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="9FH5ZgE5Ew"> <p>Bruce Lehrmann's barrister Matthew Richardson SC quizzed Wilkinson about the edit, saying, "That's very poor journalism, isn't it?"</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="q0X6OvsQtG"> <p>Wilkinson replied, "I'm disappointed to see that. It is a detail which escaped my attention."</p> <p>Elsewhere during the court proceedings, Wilkinson bit back at Lehrmann's lawyer for challenging her journalistic abilities.</p> <p>On Thursday, Wilkinson was asked why she didn't ask to see the metadata on a photo of a bruise on Brittany Higgins' thigh, which she claimed was from the alleged rape. </p> <p>Wilkinson told the Federal Court that she was not "tech-savvy" and did not know what metadata was, saying, "I didn't know photos had metadata."</p> <div data-body-element-id="A9GzCf-Iqm"> <p>Lehrmann's lawyer Mr Richardson was quick to ask in response: "You describe yourself as a serious investigative journalist?"</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="3eDMnH9cY0"> <p>She bit back, stating she only refers to herself as a "journalist".</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="tMBlnKPjTn"> <p>Mr Richardson said, "You were emphatic yesterday when you said you were not a tabloid journalist.'</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="9WzAcuceor"> <p>She repeated: "I describe myself as a journalist, Mr Richardson."</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="bUfGxqx44_"> <p>He said given she had been a journalist for 40 years, "it was most improbable that you did not know what metadata was."</p> </div> <div data-body-element-id="QIHT-BVE1b"> <p>She replied, "I disagree."</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> </div> </div>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

“That’s insulting”: Brittany Higgins grilled over "fabricated" allegations

<p>Brittany Higgins has denied she lied when she accused Bruce Lehrmann of sexually assaulting her in Parliament House. </p> <p>Higgins was called to give evidence on Thursday, as part of Lehrmann's defamation suit against Lisa Wilkinson and Channel Ten, when she was grilled during cross-examination by Lehrmann’s barrister Steven Whybrow SC.</p> <p>“That is a fabrication that you were sexually assaulted,” Whybrow said.</p> <p>“I understand that is your assertion. It’s insulting but I understand it,” Higgins replied. </p> <p>Whybrow’s questioning revolved around how Higgins’ recollection of events changed between statements she gave to the police, in court, to journalists from Ten and a news website, and in the first draft of a book she sent to publisher Penguin Random House.</p> <p>One example was that the location of a box of chocolates eaten after the alleged rape had changed between versions.</p> <p>“I want to suggest to you that is an example of your evidence evolving as you find out new information,” Whybrow said.</p> <p>“No, I don’t accept that,” Higgins answered.</p> <p>She admitted giving incorrect statements to Wilkinson and Ten producer Angus Llewellyn during a five-hour interview conducted in January 2021, before she was filmed for bombshell <em>The Project</em> broadcast that first aired Brittany's story. </p> <p>These claims, which included what security did and what she was wearing after the alleged rape, were based on her beliefs at the time, the court was told.</p> <p>Lehrmann has also already given evidence in which he admitted to a number of lies and false statements he gave to police, Parliament House security, his employer and supervisor, and the media.</p> <p>Lehrmann is suing Lisa Wilkinson and Channel Ten for defamation, specifically citing a February 2021 report on <em>The Project</em> in which Higgins was interviewed and her sexual assault story made national headlines. </p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images </em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Bruce Lehrmann condemns damning inquiry and labels trial conduct as a "dark chapter"

<p>Bruce Lehrmann has expressed his strong disapproval of a damning inquiry into his rape trial, referring to it as "a dark chapter" in the justice system.</p> <p>In response to the inquiry's findings, Bruce Lehrmann has criticised the Director of Public Prosecutions, Shane Drumgold, for his conduct during the trial, stating that it was a troubling episode for the justice system.</p> <p>The former Liberal staffer, who intends to pursue a multimillion-dollar compensation claim over the trial's handling, commended his legal team, led by Steve Whybrow SC and Kamy Saeedi lawyers.</p> <p>Mr. Lehrmann stated to <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/bruce-lehrmann-slams-damning-inquiry-describes-trial-conduct-as-dark-chapter/news-story/b5b6ec06d5b435f8870a1e7d5b9ae4b8" target="_blank" rel="noopener">news.com.au</a>, "Much of what we are reading, my brilliant criminal defense team led by Steve Whybrow SC suspected all along. I owe everything to the lawyers who have surrounded me. This is overwhelming and alarming reading."</p> <p>He also acknowledged Mr. Sofronoff and his team for revealing the truth and shedding light on what he perceives as a dark chapter for the ACT Justice system. Mr. Lehrmann promised to share more details once the Chief Minister releases the full report to the public.</p> <p>The landmark inquiry found that the prosecution's legal initiation was appropriate, but it severely criticised Mr. Drumgold's actions during the trial.</p> <p>Walter Sofronoff KC, a former Supreme Court judge in Queensland, affirmed the lawfulness of the police's charges against Mr. Lehrmann and agreed that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions was justified in prosecuting based on the available evidence.</p> <p>It is essential to note that this finding does not reflect Mr. Lehrmann's guilt or innocence but focuses on the conduct of the police and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.</p> <p>Mr. Lehrmann remains innocent under the law since he was never convicted, as the trial collapsed following an allegation of juror misconduct.</p> <p>However, the inquiry revealed damning evidence against Mr. Drumgold, accusing him of "knowingly lying" to the ACT Supreme Court regarding his alleged warning to Lisa Wilkinson concerning her Logies speech.</p> <p>The report uncovered unethical conduct by Mr. Drumgold, including his use of a note related to a discussion he had with Ms. Wilkinson just days before her speech.</p> <p><em>The Australian</em> newspaper <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/sofronoff-report-reveals-shane-drumgold-lied-during-bruce-lehrmann-rape-case/news-story/07d25b9c79364a10473806e3df48dfa7" target="_blank" rel="noopener">obtained a complete copy</a> of the extensive 600-page Sofronoff report, which confirmed the seriousness of the findings against Mr. Drumgold. This led Mr. Sofronoff to contemplate whether the DPP was suitable to continue holding the office.</p> <p>The inquiry was initiated after Mr. Drumgold wrote a letter to ACT Chief Police Officer Neil Gaughan in November 2022, demanding an inquiry and making "scandalous allegations" about political interference. However, the inquiry revealed that these allegations were baseless and untrue.</p> <p>The report further criticised Mr. Drumgold for not disclosing crucial material to the defence, which is a significant violation of the principle of disclosure in criminal litigation.</p> <p>Chief Justice Lucy McCallum's stern criticism of Ms. Wilkinson's Logies speech led to a four-month delay in the trial and sparked a firestorm of adverse publicity.</p> <p>The report favoured Ms. Wilkinson's account over Mr. Drumgold's, suggesting that he had knowingly lied to Chief Justice McCallum about his warning to the broadcaster.</p> <p>Mr. Sofronoff stated that while Ms. Wilkinson should have exercised caution in making the speech given the trial's proximity, Mr. Drumgold had a responsibility to the court and failed to act appropriately.</p> <p>In conclusion, the Sofronoff inquiry found significant misconduct on the part of Mr. Drumgold and raised concerns about the fairness of the trial conduct in Bruce Lehrmann's case.</p> <p><em>Images: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

No apologies: Ben Roberts-Smith breaks silence

<p>Former SAS soldier Ben Roberts-Smith has returned to Australia for the first time since losing his defamation case against Nine newspapers.</p> <p>Roberts-Smith touched down in Perth on June 14 and said he was shattered by the outcome of his defamation case against The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Canberra Times.</p> <p>This is the first time he has spoken out publicly since the landmark ruling.</p> <p>"It was a terrible result and obviously the incorrect result. We will look at it and consider whether or not we need to file an appeal," Roberts-Smith said after landing in Perth.</p> <p>"There is not much more I can say about it ... we just have to work through it and I'll take the advice as it comes.”</p> <p>He was spotted checking into business class with his girlfriend in Queenstown, New Zealand prior to touching down in Perth.</p> <p>Roberts-Smith rules out apologising to families of the victims impacted by his actions in Afghanistan.</p> <p>"We haven't done anything wrong, so we won't be making any apologies," he said.</p> <p>As he was collecting his luggage at Perth airport, he was approached by a man who voiced his support for the former soldier.</p> <p>Roberts-Smith's return comes on the same day as reports that an Australian Federal Police investigation into his alleged war crimes had collapsed.</p> <p>The decision by the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions not to prosecute Roberts-Smith based on evidence collected by the AFP has led to a new joint task force being assembled to investigate alleged executions.</p> <p>The task force is comprised of detectives from the specialist war crimes agency, the Office of the Special Investigator and a new team of federal police investigators not related to the abandoned AFP probe.</p> <p>Roberts-Smith did not appear in the Federal Court when a judge found allegations he murdered or was complicit in the killing of four unarmed Afghans while deployed overseas were "substantially true” in a bombshell defamation ruling.</p> <p>The former soldier insists there was never any foul play.</p> <p><em>Image credit: A Current Affair</em></p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

Father of murdered Aussie soldier voices support for Ben Roberts-Smith

<p> The father of an Australian soldier murdered in Afghanistan has spoken out in defence of former SAS member Ben Roberts-Smith.</p> <p>Hugh Poate’s son, Robert, was playing cards with two other Australians when they were tragically shot by a rogue Afghan soldier named Hekmatullah in 2012.</p> <p>According to Poate, Roberts-Smith was simply following orders in a bid to apprehend Hekmatullah, who had brutally taken the lives of their son.</p> <p>Acting on intelligence, they were taken to the village of Darwan, where Roberts-Smith had allegedly kicked a farmer named Ali Jan off a cliff and ordered his execution.</p> <p>“These citizens in the village could well have been a civilian one day and pulling the trigger the next, that‘s the way the Taliban operated. This perspective should have been included to provide some balance and context,” Poate told the<em> Daily Telegraph</em>.</p> <p>The federal court <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/a-win-for-the-press-a-big-loss-for-ben-roberts-smith-what-does-this-judgment-tell-us-about-defamation-law" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dismissed</a> Roberts-Smith’s defamation trial against the <em>Sydney Morning Herald</em>, <em>The Age</em>, and the <em>Canberra Times</em>, with Justice Besanko concluding the various titles had substantially proven the former soldier unlawfully killed four unarmed Afghan prisoners during his service in the SAS between 2009 and 2012.</p> <p>The judgement also acknowledged instances of Roberts-Smith’s alleged bullying of fellow soldiers. However, the court dismissed two other murder allegations and an accusation that he had assaulted his mistress.</p> <p>In his thorough 736-page judgement, the judge determined that Roberts-Smith and four key witnesses called to testify were both dishonest and unreliable in their evidence.</p> <p>Following the release of the completed judgement, Roberts-Smith’s legal team is now closely inspecting the document to identify potential grounds for an appeal.</p> <p>Poate emphasised the fact that Hekmatullah was captured and convicted of war crimes and subsequently released. In comparison, Roberts-Smith <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/news/news/australian-war-memorial-urged-to-remove-ben-roberts-smith-s-uniform-from-display" target="_blank" rel="noopener">has not been convicted</a> of any war crimes. Potae perceives the treatment of Roberts-Smith as a case of double standards.</p> <p>Additionally, Poate asserted that the responsibility for any wrongdoing committed by the SAS in Afghanistan lies with others in the Australian Defence Force (ADF). By acknowledging the collective accountability within the organisation, Poate has suggested a wider perspective on the matter.</p> <p><em>Image credit: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

What should the Australian War Memorial do with its heroic portraits of Ben Roberts-Smith?

<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kit-messham-muir-129956">Kit Messham-Muir</a>, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873">Curtin University</a></em></p> <p>On Friday, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/dismissed-legal-experts-explain-the-judgment-in-the-ben-roberts-smith-defamation-case-191503">Federal Court dismissed</a> Ben Roberts-Smith’s defamation case against The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Canberra Times.</p> <p>Justice Anthony Besanko ruled the newspapers had established, by the “balance of probabilities” (the standard of evidence in a civil lawsuit), that Roberts-Smith had committed war crimes.</p> <p>Following the ruling, much public debate has focused on what the Australian War Memorial should do with Robert-Smith’s uniform, helmet and other artefacts of his on display.</p> <p>Greens senator David Shoebridge <a href="https://twitter.com/DavidShoebridge/status/1664140665666826240">called for</a> the removal of these objects from public display to correct the official record and “to begin telling the entire truth of Australia’s involvement in that brutal war.”</p> <p>The topic of what to do with Roberts-Smith’s uniform and helmet was debated on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sH1oVNVJP1k">ABC’s Insiders yesterday</a>: should the display be removed, effectively cancelled, or changed to tell the full story?</p> <h2>The case of the oil paintings</h2> <p>It is not just these artefacts on display. The memorial also has two heroic oil painting portraits of Roberts-Smith by one of Australia’s leading artists, <a href="http://www.michaelzavros.com/">Michael Zavros</a>.</p> <p>These paintings were commissioned by the memorial in 2014.</p> <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=448&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=563&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=563&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529980/original/file-20230605-16883-qhpzvv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=563&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption><span class="caption">Michael Zavros, Pistol grip (Ben Roberts-Smith VC), 2014, oil on canvas, 162 cm x 222 cm.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C2092390">© Australian War Memorial</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure> <p><a href="https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C2092390">Pistol Grip (Ben Roberts-Smith VC)</a> is a larger-than-life-sized depiction of Roberts-Smith, camouflage arms outstretched, mimicking the action of holding a pistol.</p> <p>The smaller <a href="https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C2092391">Ben Roberts-Smith VC</a> depicts him in ceremonial military uniform.</p> <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=442&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=442&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=442&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529982/original/file-20230605-23-pgn7xe.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption><span class="caption">Michael Zavros, Ben Roberts-Smith VC, 2014, oil on canvas, 30 x 42 cm.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C2092391">© Australian War Memorial</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure> <p>In an <a href="https://memoreview.net/reviews/the-anti-art-of-war-by-rex-butler-and-paris-lettau">article in arts criticism website Memo</a> yesterday, respected Monash University art historian Rex Butler and arts journalist Paris Lettau weighed into the debate.</p> <p>Butler and Lettau say Pistol Grip is:</p> <blockquote> <p>threatening, over-bearing, macho, hyper-masculine, celebratory, and enormous, like the man himself – some 220 centimetres wide and 160 centimetres high.</p> </blockquote> <p>When Zavros created his large portrait it was a depiction of a soldier doing what he was trained – and venerated – for doing.</p> <p>It is an aggressive pose that, given current developments, can be read in a much more sinister way. It touches on a far bigger question of how national institutions for the public memory of war address difficult and morally ambiguous moments in a national story.</p> <h2>Moral and ethical ambiguity</h2> <p>When the Canadian War Museum opened at its new site in Ottawa in 2005, its new displays included two paintings in their collection by Canadian artist <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-in-her-powerful-portraiture-military-artist-gertrude-kearns-pays/">Gertrude Kearns</a>.</p> <p>The paintings, Somalia without Conscience, 1996, and The Dilemma of Kyle Brown: Paradox in the Beyond, 1995, dealt with one of the most shameful episodes in Canada’s military history, known as the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia_affair">Somalia Affair</a>.</p> <p>In 1992, the Canadian Airborne Regiment was deployed as peacekeepers to Somalia. In 1993, 16-year-old Shidane Arone was found hiding in the Canadian base, believed to have been stealing supplies. He was tortured, and soldiers photographed themselves with the semi-conscious boy. Master Corporal Clayton Matchee and his subordinate Private Kyle Brown <a href="https://www.vice.com/en/article/7x75xg/remembering-the-somalia-affair-canadas-forgotten-abu-ghraib-moment">were charged</a> with his murder and torture.</p> <p>Somalia without Conscience depicts Matchee posing with the beaten Arone, while The Dilemma of Kyle Brown depicts Brown symbolically holding two potential fates in his hands: a lightly coloured cube in his right hand, and a darkened cube in his left. It addresses an ethical grey area many soldiers face during active service when the hierarchy of command comes into direct conflict with conscience.</p> <p>Following the opening of the new Canadian War Museum, the presence of Kearns’s paintings sparked <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=nltxDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT519&lpg=PT519&dq=%E2%80%9Cwas+not+only+telling+the+stories+of+heroism+and+courage+that+most+of+them+expected+to+be+told+but+also+stories+about+failures,+disappointments,+and+human+frailty%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=sfQZw_2qXL&sig=ACfU3U18i4X0ERdbg0wfOKXbnOIe1-5-pA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjXw6Sdk6v_AhXGVmwGHbRwDh0Q6AF6BAgJEAM#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9Cwas%20not%20only%20telling%20the%20stories%20of%20heroism%20and%20courage%20that%20most%20of%20them%20expected%20to%20be%20told%20but%20also%20stories%20about%20failures%2C%20disappointments%2C%20and%20human%20frailty%E2%80%9D&f=false">intense debate</a>. Curator Laura Brandon received abusive emails from members of the public.</p> <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/529986/original/file-20230605-23-vgma1q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption><span class="caption">The Canadian War Museum in Ottawa.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure> <p>The museum copped criticism from figures such as the head of the National Council of Veterans Associations, who <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/war-museum-s-paintings-anger-veterans-group-1.546113">called</a> the paintings a “trashy, insulting tribute” and urged a boycott of the opening of the new museum.</p> <p>Discussing this controversy in 2007, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1354856507072860?journalCode=cona">Brandon said</a> what upset veteran communities was that “their” museum:</p> <blockquote> <p>was not only telling the stories of heroism and courage that most of them expected to be told but also stories about failures, disappointments, and human frailty.</p> </blockquote> <p>Brandon remained steadfast the museum needed to address the messy ambiguities of war and, despite pressure, kept Kearns’s paintings on display for the duration of the exhibition.</p> <h2>The complexity of contemporary art</h2> <p>Brandon’s curatorial decision to display Kearns’s Somalia paintings strike at the heart of what is special and important about contemporary war art in a national museum.</p> <p>Contemporary art presents ethical and moral complexity, grey zones and a range of perspectives. This is vital in a healthy liberal democracy.</p> <p>While Brandon’s choice to show Kearns’s Somalia paintings attracted criticism, the museum remained committed to telling a story that is difficult, ethically and morally complex, and uncomfortable for Canadians.</p> <p>To remove Zavros’ portraits from display would remove the now-untenable hero narrative that once surrounded Roberts-Smith. But doing so would also rewrite public memory by effectively erasing an important part of why and how Roberts-Smith was revered.</p> <p>These portraits now represent a morally complex story that needs to be addressed by our national war museum.</p> <p>To remove the portraits would miss a valuable opportunity to debate important questions about how we construct hero stories.</p> <p>So, how could these portraits still be shown in future?</p> <p>Zavros’ portraits were already complex works.</p> <p>Following Friday’s announcement, it is more important they are seen in all their additional multi-layered and problematic complexity.</p> <p>The portraits show us how we create the nation through the stories we tell ourselves, and how dynamic that narrative can be. The portraits present a valuable opportunity to show narratives of war – like the stories of our own lives – are never simple, consistent and coherent.</p> <p>The portraits should be displayed in ways that address this complexity, capturing the evolving story of Roberts-Smith in explanatory wall text. There is an opportunity here to not simply “correct” the official record, as Shoebridge suggests, but to have a deeper conversation about the role of hero narratives in diverting attention away from more important public debates about Australia’s involvements in conflicts.</p> <p>Maybe this could be addressed in the art the memorial commissions in future.</p> <p>The most compelling contemporary art works – and the most valuable museum displays in our national institutions – are those that consider our complex stories, raise important and self-reflective questions, and challenge simplistic narratives. <!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/206934/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em>Image credit: Getty</em></p> <p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kit-messham-muir-129956">Kit Messham-Muir</a>, Professor in Art, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873">Curtin University</a></em></p> <p>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-should-the-australian-war-memorial-do-with-its-heroic-portraits-of-ben-roberts-smith-206934">original article</a>.</p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Ben Roberts-Smith’s furious phone call to fellow soldier

<p>A livid Ben Roberts-Smith has berated a fellow soldier he believed had been speaking to the media about war allegations, demanding he “stick to the f**king code”, newly released audio has revealed.</p> <p>Nine’s 60 Minutes played a recording of the exchange between Roberts-Smith and a fellow SAS member known as “Soldier M” in 2018 amid a media frenzy.</p> <p>Soldier M is a relative of Australia’s most wealthy individual, billionaire Gina Rineheart, and prior to the phone call, Roberts-Smith had sent him a threatening legal letter, with the mining magnate CC’d in.</p> <p>“Yeah, it’s RS, mate,” Mr Roberts-Smith says in the audio.</p> <p>“Because I know you’ve talked s**t about me, right? I know that.</p> <p>“I’ve got no ill will towards anyone that has no ill will towards me, it’s real simple. So you know, like, I’m 100 per cent, I stick to the f**king code, mate, 100 per cent, and I have. So all the s**t that’s going on, I’m still probably the only c**t that hasn’t f**king spoken.</p> <p>“I don’t trust you, mate, I haven’t been able to trust you for a long time. You say we’re mates. We used to be actually, but for some f**king reason I’ve just become the centre of all evil for you and the group of people …</p> <p>“You’ve got a young child, I’ve got a f**king family, I want to move on, I’m so sick of f**king army, the unit and all the bulls**t. Just remember I was minding my own business, just trying to do my job, and I get attacked by all these f**king journalists. I haven’t spoken a word about it to anyone in the unit.”</p> <p>On June 1 Roberts-smith lost his lengthy defamation trial against Nine newspapers’ The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and The Canberra Times.</p> <p>Following the verdict, The Australian War Memorial has faced calls to <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/news/news/australian-war-memorial-urged-to-remove-ben-roberts-smith-s-uniform-from-display" target="_blank" rel="noopener">remove the decorated soldier’s uniform</a> from its display.</p> <p>The 22-week trial saw 32 current and former SAS members provide evidence.</p> <p>One of the 32, known as “Person Y”, who has never spoken to the media, appeared anonymously on 60 Minutes on June 4.</p> <p>“You don’t win insurgencies on body counts, yet here is a guy who thinks he’s going to win the war by killing as many people as possible,” he told the program.</p> <p>“We are not above the law, we are not above the rules of engagement, but I think for him he felt he was above all that, that the rules don’t apply. Many people are having a hard time reconciling the fact that someone they thought was a national hero is in fact the complete opposite, proven to be a bully, a liar and a murderer.</p> <p>“It’s a tough pill to swallow, especially for a country that’s believed the lies for so long.</p> <p>“I think they thought they were above the law, that they were not going to be caught, that it was a free-for-all.</p> <p>“I think I could say on behalf of every guy who took the witness stand that none of us wanted to be there, that’s just not who we are.”</p> <p>One day after the verdict was reached, Seven CEO James Warburton revealed Roberts-Smith had resigned from the network.</p> <p>“We thank Ben for his commitment to Seven and wish him all the best,” he said.</p> <p><em>Image credit: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

A win for the press, a big loss for Ben Roberts-Smith: what does this judgment tell us about defamation law?

<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-rolph-118815">David Rolph</a>, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a></em></p> <p>At the heart of the spectacular defamation trial brought by decorated Australian soldier Ben Roberts-Smith were two key questions.</p> <p>Had the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Times damaged his reputation when they published in 2018 a series of explosive stories accusing him of murder and other crimes while in Afghanistan?</p> <p>And could the newspapers successfully defend their reporting as true?</p> <p>Today, in Sydney, Federal Court Justice Anthony Besanko found the newspapers were indeed able to establish the “substantial truth” of key allegations around killing of unarmed Afghan male prisoners.</p> <p>An <a href="https://twitter.com/Kate_McClymont/status/1664130451869663232">appeal</a> may still be on the cards, but this is a high-profile loss for a very prominent person. The costs will be substantial. The usual rule is that the losing party pays their own costs and those of the winning party.</p> <p>So, even though people say defamation law in Australia has a reputation for favouring plaintiffs, this case shows even plaintiffs do sometimes lose defamation cases in Australia.</p> <p>More broadly, this case shows how hard it is to use defamation law to repair any perceived damage to your reputation. Once a case begins, you never can control what will be said in court.</p> <h2>What was this case about?</h2> <p>The case centred on several defamatory meanings (or, as they’re known in defamation law, “<a href="https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services/access-to-files-and-transcripts/online-files/ben-roberts-smith">imputations</a>”) that Roberts-Smith said the papers had made against him.</p> <p>Among these were that he’d <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/110-days-41-witnesses-and-15-key-questions-to-answer-what-the-ben-roberts-smith-case-was-about-20230209-p5cjdp.html">killed</a> unarmed Afghan male prisoners and ordered junior soldiers to execute others in Afghanistan between 2006 and 2012.</p> <p>Roberts-Smith denied wrongdoing, but the newspapers had pleaded a defence of truth. That means to win this case, they needed to prove the meanings conveyed by their reporting – even if those meanings were unintended – were true.</p> <p>Besanko, reading a summary judgment today, said the newspapers were able to establish the substantial truth of some of the most serious imputations in the case.</p> <p>For other imputations, Besanko found the newspapers were able to establish “contextual truth”.</p> <p>Substantial truth means what is sounds like – that the allegation published was, in substance, true. Defamation law does not require strict, complete or absolute accuracy. Minor or inconsequential errors of detail are irrelevant. What matters is: has the publisher established what they published was, in substance, true?</p> <p>Contextual truth is a fallback defence. The court has to weigh what has been found to be true against what has been found to be unproven. If the true statements about the plaintiff were worse than the unproven statements, then the plaintiff’s reputation was not overall damaged by the unproven statements, and the publisher has a complete defence.</p> <p>In other words, Besanko found most of the imputations to be true. And, when considered against those which were not proven to be true, the remaining unproven imputations did not damage Roberts-Smith’s reputation.</p> <h2>What does this case tell us about defamation in Australia?</h2> <p>The court heard several explosive claims during the course of this trial, including that evidence on USB sticks had been put into a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/aug/13/court-hears-ben-roberts-smiths-ex-wife-dug-up-usb-sticks-from-family-backyard">lunchbox and buried</a> in a backyard and that Roberts-Smith had allegedly <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/13/woman-who-says-ben-roberts-smith-punched-her-sustained-an-injury-in-a-fall-earlier-on-same-night-defamation-trial-hears">punched a woman</a> in their hotel room.</p> <p>Roberts-Smith said he didn’t bury the USBs or withhold information from a war crimes inquiry and denied that he had punched the woman.</p> <p>But the fact this widely scrutinised case yielded such astonishing testimony, day in and day out, shows how risky it is to use defamation law to restore perceived injury to one’s reputation.</p> <p>Defamation law is seeking to correct people’s views about the plaintiff. But it’s open to doubt that defamation law is actually any good at securing its own stated purpose of changing people’s minds about the plaintiff.</p> <p>The problem is the law is a very blunt instrument. It’s very hard to get people to change their minds about what they think of you.</p> <p>All litigation involves risk and defamation trials are even riskier. You never can control what can come out in court, as this litigation demonstrates so clearly.</p> <p>Roberts-Smith has sued to protect his reputation, but in doing so, a range of adverse things have been said in court. And whatever is said in court is covered by the defence of absolute privilege; you can’t sue for defamation for anything said in court that is reported accurately and fairly.</p> <h2>The 2021 defamation law reforms</h2> <p>The law that applies in the Roberts-Smith case is the defamation law we had before major reforms introduced in July 2021 across most of Australia.</p> <p>These reforms introduced a new defence known as the public interest defence. To use this defence, a publisher has to demonstrate that they reasonably believed the matter covered in their published material is in the public interest.</p> <p>As this defence didn’t exist prior to 2021, the publishers in the Roberts-Smith case used the defence of truth.</p> <p>If a case like this were litigated today following these reforms, it is highly likely the publisher would use the new public interest defence.</p> <p>Given the <a href="https://theconversation.com/lachlan-murdoch-could-well-have-won-his-crikey-lawsuit-so-why-did-he-drop-it-204279">Murdoch versus Crikey</a> case was settled, we may yet wait some time to see what’s required to satisfy the public interest test in a defamation case.</p> <p>But as today’s decision demonstrates, sometimes the truth alone will prevail.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/206759/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-rolph-118815">David Rolph</a>, Professor of Law, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a></em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-win-for-the-press-a-big-loss-for-ben-roberts-smith-what-does-this-judgment-tell-us-about-defamation-law-206759">original article</a>.</em></p> <p><em>Images: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Australian War Memorial urged to remove Ben Roberts-Smith’s uniform from display

<p>The Australian War Memorial is being urged to remove Ben Roberts-Smith’s uniform from its display after the federal court dismissed the defamation case initiated by Australia’s most decorated living soldier.</p> <p>However, the Australian Special Air Association has argued it was “a very disappointing day” for veterans who had served in Afghanistan, noting the majority who had done the right thing were being “re-traumatised after having gone through a difficult war”.</p> <p>In the defamation case ruling on June 1, Justice Anthony Besanko found that, on the balance of probabilities, Roberts-smith kicked a handcuffed prisoner off a cliff in Darwin in 2012 before ordering a subordinate Australian soldier to shoot the injured man dead.</p> <p>Besanko also found that in 2009, Roberts-Smith had ordered the execution of an elderly man found hiding in a tunnel in a bombed-out compound codenamed “Whiskey 108”, including murdering a disabled man with a prosthetic leg during that same mission, with a machine gun.</p> <p>The majority of politicians in Canberra were hesitant to weigh in on the implications of the ruling, but the Greens described the judgement as “an important win for fearless journalism in the public interest”.</p> <p>David Shoebridge, the Greens’ defence and justice spokesperson said, “If this judgment stands, the first step in correcting the official record is for the Australian War Memorial to immediately remove Ben Roberts-Smith’s uniform from public display and to begin telling the entire truth of Australia’s involvement in that brutal war.</p> <p>“This is not justice for the families who lost loved ones or for the communities that have been brutalised by war crimes, but it takes us a step closer.”</p> <p>Shoebridge is also calling on the Albanese government to “urgently progress compensation for families of victims of alleged Afghanistan war crimes, one of the key outstanding recommendations of the Brereton report”.</p> <p>He has urged the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, to “step in and end the unjust prosecution of Afghanistan war crimes whistleblower David McBride”.</p> <p>A spokesperson for the defence minister, Richard Marles, said, “This is a civil defamation matter to which the commonwealth is not a party and it would be inappropriate to provide comment.”</p> <p>Speaking to ABC TV, the national chairman of the Australian Special Air Service Association, Martin Hamilton-Smith downplayed the broader significance of the ruling, saying it was not a criminal proceeding.</p> <p>When speaking generally about investigations overseen by the Office of Special Investigator (OSI), he said one person had been charged to date over allegations of war crimes in Afghanistan — and raised concerns that “justice delayed is justice denied”.</p> <p>Hamilton-Smith called on OSI to “get these matters into a criminal court where they can be dealt with properly and the truth can be established”.</p> <p>In 2020, the Brereton report found “credible” information to implicate 25 current or former special forces personnel in the alleged unlawful killing of 39 individuals and the cruel treatment of two others.</p> <p>When asked whether Roberts-Smith should hand over his Victoria Cross, Hamilton-Smith said, “I think the only way you will get the real truth of this is to get it into the criminal court where both sides of the story can be told and beyond reasonable doubt the facts established.”</p> <p>A spokesperson for OSI said defamation proceedings were a “a civil matter between the parties”, adding, “It would not be appropriate to comment on specific allegations or whether they are the subject of investigation.”</p> <p>The Coalition’s foreign affairs spokesperson, Simon Birmingham, described the defamation ruling as “certainly significant”, and stated it was a legal process “that deserves to be respected”.</p> <p>However, he said it would be “a difficult day for many” of Australia’s current and former defence force personnel.</p> <p>“Australia is a country that applies a standard, in terms of expectations of our serving personnel and the transparency and accountability, that few other nations in the world apply,” Birmingham told ABC TV.</p> <p>“We should be proud of those standards but we should also be proud overwhelmingly of our personnel, of all who have served.”</p> <p>Birmingham was reluctant to make broader comments about the judgement’s implication for press freedom, adding the outcome would “obviously weigh heavily in terms of what proceedings may be initiated by others in future”.</p> <p>The shadow defence minister and former SAS captain Andrew Hastie was subpoenaed by the newspapers to give evidence during the defamation case but declined to comment.</p> <p><em>Image credit: Getty</em></p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

Aussie patient given new drug worth $5 million per dose

<p>A potential cure for a rare genetic disease is being trialled, and it comes with a hefty price tag.</p> <p>Sydney’s Royal Prince Alfred Hospital is part of a groundbreaking new trial aimed at potentially curing haemophilia B – a hereditary bleeding disorder.</p> <p>Patients with haemophilia B have a mutation on the F9 gene, which causes excessive bleeding and damage to joins as they lack the protein that helps blood to clot.</p> <p>A mere 40 patients worldwide will be infused with the gene therapy, with each dose the equivalent of $5 million, or over $1,000 a drop.</p> <p>A safe virus carrying the F9 gene is infused into the body, sending it to the liver cells, where doctors hope the protein is made for the rest of the patient’s life.</p> <p>Professor John Rasko, Head of Cell and Molecular Therapies at RPA, said the process is a “thrilling moment in the history of gene therapy”</p> <p>"We are pushing the boundaries of medical technology hoping to bring cures to individuals," he said. "It's a massive international effort that takes time and money and ultimately the manufacturing alone costs millions and millions of dollars."</p> <p>Haemophilia B patients currently require three injections a week. This revolutionary treatment could mean just one infusion in a lifetime.</p> <p>The infusion on May 22 was the culmination of more than two decades of work.</p> <p><em>Image credit: Shutterstock</em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Mark Latham sued over homophobic tweet

<p>Mark Latham is being sued by New South Wales independent MP Alex Greenwich, after he failed to apologise for a "disgusting" homophobic tweet. </p> <p>Greenwich said he will initiate defamation proceedings against the One Nation NSW leader in the coming days, after he gave Latham until Thursday May 18th to issue an apology for the tweet against the openly gay member for Sydney. </p> <p>Greenwich confirmed the legal action would proceed after being by Latham's lawyers that he had no intention of apologising. </p> <p><a href="https://oversixty.com.au/news/news/mark-latham-under-fire-over-disgusting-homophobic-tweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Latham's tweet</a> made headlines in March, after the politicians became engaged in a war of words over Twitter when discussing <span style="caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: abcsans, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;">the violent protest at St Michael's Church in Sydney's west, which saw members of the LGBTQIA+ community be attacked by religious extremists. </span></p> <p class="_39n3n" style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: abcsans, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif;">More than a dozen LGBTQIA+ protesters were ambushed by hundreds of men outside an event at the church where Mr Latham spoke about parental rights and religious freedom. </p> <p class="_39n3n" style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: abcsans, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif;">In an article Mr Greenwich called Mr Latham a "disgusting human being" who risks causing a "great deal of damage to our state". </p> <p class="_39n3n" style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: abcsans, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif;">Latham was quick to respond on Twitter, saying "That's disgusting?" What about..." followed by a graphic and homophobic comment that OverSixty has chosen not to publish. </p> <p>Greenwich said his decision to take legal action against Latham was something that required much consideration, but something he feels he must do. </p> <p>"This is not a process I enter into lightly, and a process I wish I didn't have to engage in," Greenwich said in a statement.</p> <p>"However, Mr Latham's homophobic, sexualised attack has exposed me to contempt, ridicule and extreme abuse, based on my sexuality, and demands actions."</p> <p>Greenwich has lodged a complaint of homosexual vilification and sexual harassment against Latham with Anti-Discrimination NSW.</p> <p>He has also made a police complaint against Latham for using a carriage service to menace, harass and offend.</p> <p>"It's 2023 and LGBTQIA+ Australians shouldn't have to put up with abuse that targets our sexuality, character, or ability to do our jobs," Greenwich said.</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Decision reached over Ed Sheeran's copyright trial

<p>Ed Sheeran has emerged victorious from a lengthy legal battle that claimed he "ripped off" another popular song. </p> <p>Sheeran, 32, was being sued over his 2014 single <em>Thinking Out Loud</em> by Structured Asset Sales, who claim that Sheeran's hit took elements directly from Marvin Gaye's <em>Let's Get It On</em>.</p> <p>On Thursday, the court ruled that the British singer-songwriter did not plagiarise the song, with the jury of three men and four women only taking three hours to reach a decision.</p> <p>Sheeran stood up and hugged his team after jurors ruled that he “independently” created his song, as he stopped outside the courtroom to thank those who supported him through the legal battle. </p> <p>The pop star added he was “unbelievably frustrated that baseless claims like this” even make it to court.</p> <p>“I’m just a guy with a guitar who loves writing music for people to enjoy. I am not and will never allow myself to be a piggy bank for anyone to shake,” he said outside the court.</p> <p>Sheeran revealed he missed his grandmother’s funeral in Ireland as he sat through the “bogus” and “dangerous” lawsuit that claimed he stole key elements for his hit song.</p> <p>“These cords are common building blocks which were used to create music long before <em>Let’s Get it On</em> was written. Will be used to make music long after we are all gone,” Sheeran said.</p> <p>“They are a songwriter’s alphabet. Our toolkit. And should be there for all of us to use. No one owns them. Or the way they are played. In the same way nobody owns the colour blue.”</p> <p>Ed's victory comes after he declared that if he had lost the case, he would've <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/entertainment/music/i-m-done-why-ed-sheeran-is-threatening-to-quit-music" target="_blank" rel="noopener">quit</a> the music industry all together. </p> <p>Outside the court room on Monday when the court proceedings were still in progress, he expressed his exasperation over the case, and made a bold statement about the future of his career. </p> <p>"If that happens, I'm done, I'm stopping," Sheeran said, according to reports from <a title="People" href="https://people.com/music/ed-sheeran-done-if-he-loses-lets-get-it-on-copyright-lawsuit/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">People</a>.</p> <p>"I find it to be really insulting," Sheeran added. "I work really hard to be where I'm at."</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Music

Placeholder Content Image

Lisa Wilkinson launches dispute into Logies speech advice

<p>TV presenter Lisa Wilkinson has lodged a new submission to an inquiry into how the rape trial against Bruce Lehrmann was handled, with a focus on the circumstances surrounding her controversial Logies speech. </p> <p>The probe was announced in 2022 by the ACT government and was to be fronted by Walter Sofronoff KC. At the time of the announcement, it was also stressed that the probe would was about not recontesting Brittany Higgins’ rape allegation, but instead about the conduct of the criminal justice agencies. </p> <p>And in April 2023, <em>news.com.au</em> confirmed that Lisa Wilkinson had made a submission, which had not yet been made public, that outlined her experience with Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold prior to her speech at the Logie Awards - the same speech that ultimately saw the trial be delayed. </p> <p>As the publication noted, Channel 10 and their lawyers have disputed allegations that the DPP “expressly warned” Wilkinson against her address at the awards ceremony. </p> <p>This was reportedly seen in a letter leaked after the trial - one sent to the ACT Supreme Court - that saw Channel 10’s Executive Vice President Beverly McGarvey declare “neither Ms Wilkinson nor the Network Ten Senior Legal Counsel present at the conference with the DPP on June 15 2022 understood that they had been cautioned that Ms Wilkinson giving an acceptance speech at the Logie Awards could result in an application being made to the court to vacate the trial date.</p> <p>“Had they understood that a specific warning had been given, Ms Wilkinson would not have given that speech.”</p> <p>Wilkinson had been accepting an award for ‘Outstanding News Coverage or Public Affairs Report’ for her coverage of Brittany Higgins’ sexual assault allegations, and in the wake of the former <em>The Project </em>host’s words, the trial was delayed from June until October. </p> <p>Lucy McCallum, ACT Chief Justice, moved the dates “with gritted teeth” after Lehrmann’s defence team made a request following the speech and the intense media coverage that followed. </p> <p>“Unfortunately, however, the recent publicity [of the speech] does, in my view, change the landscape,’’ McCallum said. </p> <p>“Because of its immediacy, its intensity and its capacity to obliterate the important distinction between an allegation that remains untested at law.</p> <p>“For those reasons, regrettably and with gritted teeth, I have concluded that the trial date of 27 June towards which the parties have been carefully steering must be vacated.”</p> <p>Wilkinson had reportedly sought advice from DPP Shane Drumgold in 2021 to go over the evidence that she would present at trial, with a note from the meeting stating that Wilkinson had been given an opportunity to ask any questions she might have had. </p> <p>It was then that Wilkinson brought up her Logie nomination, though she reportedly noted that she didn’t believe she was in with a real chance of winning, as the show was being held by a ‘rival’ television network. </p> <p>As <em>news.com.au </em>reported, the DPP stopped Wilkinson from presenting her speech then and there, as he could neither approve nor offer her any advice regarding it, telling Wilkinson that “we are not speech editors.”</p> <p>“Notwithstanding that clear and appropriate warning, upon receiving the award, Ms Wilkinson gave a speech in which she openly referred to and praised the complainant in the present trial,” Justice McCallum said of the situation.</p> <p>“Unsurprisingly, the award, and the content of the speech have been the subject of further commentary.”</p> <p><em>Images: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Our Partners

Over 60

© Copyright 2024 OverSixty.All Rights Reserved.