TRIGGER WARNING - this book discusses a civil case that revolved around an alleged rape. There are some challenging aspects to the observations and testimony recorded here.
On 15 April 2024 Justice Michael Lee delivered his judgement in Lehrmann v Network 10. The case, which centred on proceedings brought by Bruce Lehrmann against journalist Lisa Wilkinson and Network 10 for her 2021 interview with Brittany Higgins, alleged that Wilkinson had defamed Lehrmann by accusing him of raping Higgins at Parliament House in 2019.
This book is the text of that judgement in full, which I have to concur with the blurb on:
The findings are notable for their valuable insights into future defamation and sexual assault prosecutions and for judicial education and the media. A masterclass of legal dissection, the narrative shows what civil courts can sometimes achieve in a way that criminal courts cannot.
Undoubtedly challenging reading for the non-legally trained (which I'm not), there were more than enough insights in this judgement into the forensic mind of a judge, the huge amount of information they must process, and the careful, cautious and informed thinking that goes into a judgement, the likes of which Justice Michael Lee delivered in the case cited above.
I'm grateful for the chance to get even an inkling of the work involved, and for the clear-eyed, and utterly laser like focus that this sort of case requires, and got in this example.
He Went Back for His Hat
A judgement to remember.
‘Having escaped the lions’ den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat.’
Justice Michael Lee with an introduction by Chanel Contos
On 15 April 2024 Justice Michael Lee delivered his judgement in Lehrmann v Network 10. The case, which centred on proceedings brought by Bruce Lehrmann against journalist Lisa Wilkinson and Network 10 for her 2021 interview with Brittany Higgins, alleged that Wilkinson had defamed Lehrmann by accusing him of raping Higgins at Parliament House in 2019.
It was a singular case, and the controversy has become a cause célèbre, described by the judge himself as an ‘omnishambles’. In his decision, Justice Lee laid out his reasoning in painstaking detail, and presented his close-grained reading of the evidence based on its subtleties. Critically for future sexual assault matters, his was a trauma-informed judgement that understood that the recollections of an assault victim can be inconsistent, affected by the attempted memory corrections of a traumatised person.
The findings are notable for their valuable insights into future defamation and sexual assault prosecutions and for judicial education and the media. A masterclass of legal dissection, the narrative shows what civil courts can sometimes achieve in a way that criminal courts cannot.
Add comment