Home Australia Then what is? First Lisa Wilkinson said it was the “most important” story she had ever done…then she only played a “limited role” in it. This is what he has to say after the court’s conviction against Bruce Lehrmann

Then what is? First Lisa Wilkinson said it was the “most important” story she had ever done…then she only played a “limited role” in it. This is what he has to say after the court’s conviction against Bruce Lehrmann

by Elijah
0 comment
Ms Wilkinson looked elated as she left the court with her high-powered legal team.

Lisa Wilkinson has claimed credit for her exclusive story about Bruce Lehrmann’s rape of Brittany Higgins, after distancing herself from her during thorny parts of the defamation trial.

After Judge Michael Lee ruled in favor of Network Ten, Ms Wilkinson gave a triumphant speech on the steps of the Federal Court, declaring: “I published a true story about a rape in a federal politician’s office in March 2019.” .

The speech glossed over the harsh comments Judge Lee made about Ms Wilkinson’s conduct throughout the trial, and the fact that aspects of the story claiming there was a “political cover-up” turned out to be false.

But her final acceptance of the story was a new setback for the veteran journalist who had previously said she had left it up to Ten producers to decide which parts would air.

Her lawyers went so far as to dispute the idea that she had investigated the veracity of Ms Higgins’ claims or that she was consulted in the preparation of what content made the final cut.

Here, WhatsNew2Day Australia looks at what Wilkinson has said about the story in the years since it aired in February 2021.

Ms Wilkinson looked elated as she left the court with her high-powered legal team.

Logic speech

In her now infamous speech at the Logies, Ms Wilkinson declared her work with Brittany Higgins to be “the most important” of her career.

She said: ‘I knew from the first phone call I had early last year with a young woman whose name she told me was Brittany Higgins.

‘Four incredibly intense, sleepless weeks later, when our story aired, the entire country knew Brittany Higgins’ name.

‘As Brittany warned me before going on air, her story would be seen by many of the most powerful people in this country, not as a human problem, but as a political problem.

‘Brittany Higgins was a political problem. And governments tend to like political problems to go away. But Brittany never did. And the truth is that this honor belongs to Brittany. She belongs to the unwavering courage of a 26-year-old woman.

‘It belongs to a woman who said “enough.” It belongs to a woman who inspired more than 100,000 equally angry and exhausted women and men to take to the streets across the country. [at the March 4 Justice rally] roar in numbers too large to ignore.

“Brittany, thank you for trusting me.”

In his now infamous Logies speech, Wilkinson declared that his work with Brittany Higgins was

In his now infamous speech at the Logies, Wilkinson declared his work with Brittany Higgins to be “the most important” of his career.

Under interrogation during defamation trial

By the time she was questioned, Ms Wilkinson’s history, speech and professional integrity had come under extensive scrutiny.

At the beginning of the trial, he was asked if he agreed that he had “developed, directed and presented” the story.

But he later backtracked, saying his involvement in preparing the show had diminished in the run-up to its screening, and that decisions about what aired were made by Ten’s senior management and lawyers.

“I understood that appropriate checks were being carried out and advice was being sought within Channel Ten as to whether or not those facts were appropriate to be included in the broadcast,” Wilkinson said during cross-examination.

“And I left those decisions to others more qualified than me to decide whether or not it was appropriate to keep those details in the broadcast.”

By the time she was questioned, Ms Wilkinson's history, speech and professional integrity had come under extensive scrutiny.

By the time she was questioned, Ms Wilkinson’s history, speech and professional integrity had come under extensive scrutiny.

He later said: “To put it broadly, Mr. Richardson [barrister Matthew Richardson SC, acting for Lehrmann]”I knew that Canal Diez’s legal department was aware of this story and was confident that it was appropriate for those details to be there.”

Wilkinson also expressed displeasure when Richardson brought to his attention that an important detail Higgins had mentioned in the unedited version of his two-hour interview had been cut before broadcast.

Richardson: “Holding that up is very bad journalism, isn’t it?”

Wilkinson: “I’m disappointed to see that.”

Referring again to a text message sent before broadcast by The Project executive producer Christopher Bendall, stating that Wilkinson had been responsible for “developing, shepherding and delivering” Higgins’ story, she seemed less willing to take as much credit.

“That was a very kind text message from Mr. Bendall,” Wilkinson said. “But there was a whole team that also deserved a few words in that regard.”

Richardson: “I think you agreed that what he said about you yesterday was accurate, correct?”

Wilkinson: “But I wasn’t the only person working on the story, Mr. Richardson.”

At the beginning of the article, she was asked if she agreed that she

At the beginning of the article, she was asked if she agreed that she “developed, directed and delivered” the story.

In court documents

Court papers from Wilkinson’s lawyers show they attempted to argue that she had a “limited role” in the final broadcast.

In final presentations presented by Sue Chrysanthou SC, Ms Wilkinson was described as an “experienced presenter” whose role was to “read from the pre-prepared script”.

Any claim that Ms Wilkinson was a senior journalist investigating Ms Higgins’ allegations would be “incorrect”, the document states.

“Decisions and changes were being made at a rapid pace and my client was not consulted,” Ms Chrysanthou told the court.

In closing submissions made by Sue Chrysanthou SC, Ms Wilkinson was described as a

In final presentations presented by Sue Chrysanthou SC, Ms Wilkinson was described as an “experienced presenter” whose role was to “read from the pre-prepared script”.

After the trial

Outside court, a vindicated Ms Wilkinson said: “Today, the federal court has determined that I published a true story about a rape in the office of a federal politician in March 2019.

‘I sincerely hope that the sentence gives strength to women across the country.

“I am also very grateful to have had the benefit of our independent legal team.”

He thanked his lawyer Sue Chrysanthou SC for her “experience and wise advice” which has been “a source of continued strength for me over the past 14 months”.

Wilkinson also thanked her family, friends and “generous” members of the public who often approach her in tears.

‘Throughout every step of this process, I have been surrounded by the love of my incredibly supportive family, as well as my incredible friends and colleagues. I will never be able to thank you enough.

“I also wanted to express my gratitude to the members of the public who approached me almost every day to express, often through tears, their unwavering support.”

Outside court, a vindicated Mrs Wilkinson said:

Outside court, a vindicated Ms Wilkinson said: “Today the federal court has found that I published a true story about a rape in a federal politician’s office in March 2019.”

What did the judge say about Mrs. Wilkinson?

Lisa Wilkinson welcomed the ruling, but her knowledge and experience as a journalist was called into question during Judge Lee’s ruling.

The judge described Wilkinson as a “polished and eloquent witness” but added that “unfortunately, these not inconsiderable skills were often used by her in the witness box to defend her views.”

The judge pointed to her speech at the Logie Awards, which ultimately delayed Bruce Lehrmann’s rape trial.

“Her refusal to make the obvious concession about the speech at the Logies… conveyed the message that Ms Higgins was credible and worth believing and that her rape allegations were correct,” he said.

The judge noted that she gave the speech eight days before the start of the criminal trial and, given her experience as a journalist, should have known better.

He accepted Ms Wilkinson was “sincere and genuine” in accepting the underlying truth of Ms Higgins’ allegations, noting she described the story as “the most important work I have ever done” in the offending speech.

The judge said Wilkinson was linked to Ms Higgins and made the speech because she felt the need to defend her, rather than because her employer pressured her to do so, as she had indicated.

What were the findings?

Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House after a long night of drinking, Federal Court Judge Michael Lee found.

Former Liberal staffer sues Network Ten and Wilkinson about an episode of The Project broadcast in February 2021.

In the interview, Mrs. Higgins She went public with her allegations for the first time, alleging that an unnamed staff member raped her in Parliament in March 2019..

Lehrmann claimed that friends and colleagues were able to identify him as the alleged rapist. He has always maintained his innocence.

While Judge Lee accepted on Monday there was “no doubt” that Lehrmann was identified on the show, he said he accepted the basis of the report.

Bruce Lehrmann lost his defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson

Bruce Lehrmann lost his defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson

After several hours of explanations, Judge Lee concluded: “Mr. Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins.”

Judge Lee found that, contrary to Mr Lehrmann’s evidence, sexual intercourse did occur and that Ms Higgins did not consent.

“I am convinced that there was sexual relations,” the judge stated.

“Given all my reservations as to Ms Higgins’ credibility and reliability, I found her evidence that she was unaware of her surroundings and realized when he was on top of her to be convincingly credible and had a ring of truth to it. ,’ he said.

“Ms. Higgins did not consent to sexual intercourse when she realized that Mr. Lehrmann was on top of her.”

While accepting that the rape occurred, Judge Lee made clear in his ruling that the other central allegation made by The Project – that there was a political cover-up and that Higgins was pressured into silence – was not true.

Judge Lee declared that Ms Higgins’ claims after her rape in 2019 were true, but things changed in 2021 when the narrative shifted from that of a rape to a cover-up orchestrated by the Liberal Party to avoid a pre-election scandal.

This change from a story about a rape to a story about a political scandal coincided with the involvement of Higgins’ then-boyfriend and now fiancé, David Sharaz, in the saga.

You may also like