Veteran news anchor Sandra Sully was left blushing after she accidentally misread an autocue on Monday night’s edition of 10 News First.
Sully, 59, was reporting on One Nation leader Pauline Hanson’s hate speech court battle against Greens MP Mehreen Faruqi when he accidentally saw her read the word “racist” as ” rapist”.
Reading Sydney’s newsletter, Sully said, “Also, Pauline Hanson in court.” Why the One Nation leader has been forced to fight accusations she is a rapist.
Sully quickly corrected himself and said, ‘Racist, I’m sorry. And right, racist.’
Faruqi is suing Hanson over a comment he made on X (then Twitter) in September 2022, telling him to “go fuck Pakistan” following the death of Queen Elizabeth II.
Veteran news presenter Sandra Sully, 59, (pictured) was left blushing after she accidentally reported that Pauline Hanson is fighting and claims she is a ‘rapist’ in a humiliating live TV gaffe on Monday’s edition of 10NewsFirst.
A five-day trial in the Federal Court began on Monday, in which Faruqi alleged that Hanson had engaged in racial discrimination through his tweet.
During cross-examination, Ms Faruqi reiterated that she is against all racism, but Ms Hanson’s powerful Seda Sue Chrysanthou SC argued that she is selective in her defence.
“I will tell her that she is a hypocrite and that she is only against certain forms of racism,” Ms Chrysanthou said.
Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi (left) is suing Ms Hanson (right) over a comment she made on
He focused on social media posts made by Ms Faruqi’s son, Nine journalist Osman Faruqi, which he told the court were offensive to white people.
One tweet said: “Mediocre white people should be in the trash, but instead they own everything and are everywhere.”
Asked if she thought the post constituted racism, Ms Faruqi said: “I don’t think so.”
Hanson (left) and Chrysanthou (right) leave the Supreme Court in Sydney during their case against Faruqi on Monday.
—Don’t you consider it racist? Mrs. Chrysanthou asked again.
Ms Faruqi argued that racism “has to do with people’s ethnicity and skin colour”. “It’s about who has power in this country or anywhere else in the world.”
He added: “It is tied to who has the power and authority to perpetrate racism.” In this country, power is held by whites.”
Chrysanthou focused on social media posts made by Faruqi’s son, Nine journalist Osman Faruqi (pictured), which he told the court were offensive to white people.
But he accepted that critics often share that particular post on their own social media platforms and express anger over the sentiment.
Moments earlier, Ms Faruqi had again insisted that she opposes racism, “without qualifying” exactly what that means.
Mrs Chrysanthou said: “She redefined racism to include, apparently, only some minorities. It is difficult to understand that decision.
The tug of war began after the death of the Queen (pictured) in September 2022.
“I want to explore what she considers inappropriate racism or what is acceptable racism.”
Ms Hanson’s defense rests on her belief that she made a “fair comment” in response to Ms Faruqi’s criticism of the Queen.
Just hours after the Queen’s death, Faruqi wrote: “My deepest condolences to those who knew the Queen.
‘I cannot mourn the leader of a racist empire built on lives, lands and wealth stolen from colonized peoples.
“We are reminded of the urgency of a treaty with First Nations, justice and reparations for the British colonies and becoming a republic.”
Hanson wrote: ‘You gained citizenship, bought several houses and a job in a parliament. It’s clear you’re not happy, so pack your bags and go to Pakistan.
Five hours later, Senator Hanson responded, saying Ms Faruqi should “pack her bags and go back to Pakistan”.
And he added: ‘Your attitude horrifies and disgusts me. When she emigrated to Australia, she took advantage of all the advantages of this country.
‘You got citizenship, bought several houses and a job in a parliament. It’s clear you’re not happy.
Chrysanthou argued that the barrage of criticism Faruqi received was already underway when Hanson offered his opinion.
He said Faruqi faced backlash between 11am and around 4pm, when his staff appeared to limit comments on the post.
“As a person who had sincere and genuine affection for the Queen… Senator Hanson reacted to what she read and expressed her genuine opinion about Senator Faruqi’s conduct,” Ms Chrysanthou said.
“In expressing his opinion about Senator Faruqi’s conduct, my client gives examples of past conduct to emphasize his point, being that the tweet was appalling, disgusting and hypocritical.”
He said that by trying to “point out those three things, that the conduct was appalling, disgusting and hypocritical,” (Ms. Hanson) lays out the reasons why she formed that opinion, which has classically explained the basis of the opinion, which is what a fair comment it is.
‘A fair comment means an opinion based on facts.
“One of those facts is that, without a doubt, Senator Faruqi is an immigrant from Pakistan.”
But Chrysanthou said “the inclusion of that fact does not mean that is the reason” he made the post. The post, he maintains, was a direct reflection of Mrs Faruqi’s own comments about the Queen.
“Mere reference to someone’s background, color or race is not enough to prove that the act was done because of that factor,” he said.
Chrysanthou argued that Faruqi has received much more hurtful racially motivated criticism than Hanson said, but has only decided to launch legal proceedings against the One Nation senator because she is a political opponent.
The hearing continues Tuesday.
Chrysanthou (right) argued that the barrage of criticism Faruqi received was already underway when Hanson (left) offered his opinion.
