As it happened: Moira Deeming, John Pesutto defamation case: Opposition leader cross-examined for first day in Federal Court

The court has now adjourned until tomorrow morning.

In case you’re just joining us, here’s what you need to know:

• John Pesutto’s barrister, Matthew Collins, KC, gave his opening remarks. He insisted that Deeming knew Pesutto wanted an inclusive Liberal Party and, despite this and mainstream media coverage of the controversy surrounding UK activist Kellie-Jay Keen, she went ahead and helped organise the 2023 Let Women Speak rally in Melbourne. Collins said Deeming should have known it would have been a “disaster”.
• Collins went on to tell the court that Pesutto’s case was not that Deeming, or any of the Let Women Speak organisers, invited neo-Nazis who turned up to that rally. Instead, he said, it was a fact that the neo-Nazis repeatedly claimed they were there to support and protect the rally – whether the rally organisers liked it or not. He concluded his opening statement by insisting that Deeming’s reputation had been damaged by the rally, but this was because of her own conduct. “None of it had anything to do with Mr Pesutto, none of it.”
• We also learnt, via text messages shown to the court, that former opposition leader Matthew Guy offered to move the expulsion motion against Deeming. “Just letting you know that if you want an expulsion motion moved in [sic] Deeming, and no one else will do it, I will,” Guy wrote.
• The court took a scheduled 10-minute break around 11.30am, but the case ended up being adjourned for just over half an hour. Collins left the room with Sue Chrysanthou, SC, Deeming’s barrister, and we later learned that Deeming had abandoned three of her 23 imputations, including the imputation that she was a white supremacist.
• After lunch, Chrysanthou began her cross-examination of Pesutto. She likened Deeming’s expulsion dossier to a “document prepared by an eight-year-old”.
• Pesutto said he was surprised but not shocked to learn sometime late last year or early this year that deputy Liberal leader David Southwick had recorded a March 19, 2023, meeting and failed to immediately tell him. Chrysanthou asked: “Did you ask [Southwick], ‘Well, what else have you recorded, David?’” Pesutto replied: “No. I have no reason to believe he would have.”
• Chrysanthou went on to suggest the Liberal Party’s beliefs shouldn’t change depending on who is leader. She also accused Pesutto of making “political speeches” while answering questions.
• Pesutto is expected to return to the witness box all day tomorrow, and possibly for some or all of Thursday. The defamation trial continues.

Sue Chrysanthou walked the court through Pesutto’s past comments about African gangs.

“In 2018, you made public comments on so-called Sudanese and South Sudanese gangs,” she said.

“I can’t recall particular comments I made,” Pesutto replied, but added that he spoke broadly about crime issues at the time as he was shadow attorney-general.

“As you sit there, are you seriously saying to his honour you don’t recall being heavily criticised for comments about Sudanese and South Sudanese gangs?” Chrysanthou asked.

She then questioned whether reputational damage was a reasonable basis to expel someone from the Liberal party room.

Pesutto (left) when he was shadow attorney-general.Credit: Simon Schluter

Sue Chrysanthou has put to Pesutto that he publicly shared his reasoning to seek Deeming’s expulsion before she was given a chance to respond in order to pressure members of the party room to vote in his favour.

“That’s not right,” Pesutto said. “I was greatly concerned about damage to the party and I believed the party would suffer if we did not act straight away.”

He said there were grave reputational risks and that it was not the first time he had been concerned about Deeming’s behaviour.

Pesutto has told the court he felt he needed to explain to the public why he was seeking Deeming’s expulsion from the parliamentary Liberal Party before the party room vote.

Sue Chrysanthou has been accusing him of failing to observe procedural fairness and suggested to him in court that he had been wholly unfair.

“Thank you for that speech,” Chrysanthou said after Pesutto responded.

“You understand your job here is to listen to and answer my questions? Is it your view … you’ve actually been answering them?”

The opposition leader said he believed he had.

“Hasn’t it been your preference … to give political speeches in your interest? Isn’t that what you’ve been doing all afternoon?”

“No,” Pesutto replied.

Sue Chrysanthou took Pesutto through Liberal beliefs.

“The Liberal Party was established in 1944. Do you agree?” she asked. “Are you familiar with the constitution of the Liberal Party? The Liberal Party encourages differences of opinion.”

Chrysanthou then suggested the party’s beliefs shouldn’t change depending on who is the leader.

Chrysanthou: “You were elected [leader] by one vote.”

Pesutto: “So what?”

Staying with that recording for a moment, and while Pesutto said he was surprised a recording had been made, he didn’t find it shocking that Southwick had recorded the March 19, 2023, meeting and failed to immediately tell him.

The court heard Pesutto learnt about the recording in late last year or early this year.

“No, I wasn’t shocked by it,” Pesutto said, under cross-examination from Deeming’s barrister, Sue Chrysanthou.

“Did you ask him, ‘Well, what else have you recorded, David?’” Chrysanthou asked.

“No,” Pesutto replied. “I have no reason to believe he would have.”

Chrysanthou: “You don’t think these are natural questions?”

Pesutto said he was taking a realistic approach, but conceded that, “if I had my time again, I might have done things differently”.

Pesutto has also been asked whether he knew deputy Liberal leader David Southwick was recording the meeting to expel Deeming, to which he said no.

Chrysanthou asks Pesutto whether he saw Southwick starting and stopping the recordings, which Pesutto denied.

Deputy Liberal leader David Southwick, left, and Opposition Leader John Pesutto.Credit: The Age

The opposition leader says he was “surprised” Southwick had made a recording, but didn’t ask for a copy so that he could listen to it.

Chrysanthou asks why he didn’t ask for a copy once he realised it existed, suggesting it would contradict what he had been telling the press and party room for nine months.

“It wasn’t mine to disclose,” Pesutto said.

Chrysanthou: “Isn’t it right that the only reason you raised it [with your lawyers] is because you were worried Mrs Deeming had her own recording?”

Pesutto rejected that he knew the recording would contradict his version of events.

“I think the tape shows quite the contrary,” Pesutto said.

He told the court he did not want a copy because then it would become discoverable.

Sue Chrysanthou is pressing Pesutto on what was agreed in the March 27, 2023, meeting in which Deeming was suspended for nine months.

The court has heard different versions of events as to whether or not Pesutto was required to exonerate Deeming.

Chrysanthou is contending that Pesutto didn’t satisfy what he had agreed to, even in his version of events.

She has put to Pesutto that his representation of the agreement of the March 27, 2023, party room meeting and what was agreed to was “wholly dishonest on your part at every turn”.

Deeming’s barrister is asking Pesutto about his experiences with social media, contending that he does not pay much regard to claims made on sites like X.

“Has anyone ever posted something about you on social media that is not true?” Sue Chrysanthou, SC, asked.

Moira Deeming outside court on Monday with her lawyer, Sue Chrysanthou, SC.Credit: Simon Schluter

“Every day,” he replied.

“Some of the things you’ve been accused of are serious?” Chrysanthou continued.

“I presume I’ve been called just about everything on social media,” Pesutto accepted.

Chrysanthou has taken Pesutto to an interview he did earlier this month, in which Pesutto said X was full of “vicious commentary” that was irrelevant and full of distraction.

“I don’t listen to vitriol,” Chrysanthou told the court Pesutto said in that interview.

Sue Chrysanthou has suggested the dossier circulated to justify the push to expel Deeming was akin to “a document prepared by an eight-year-old”.

Pesutto said he was satisfied the leadership team had enough information.

The opposition leader walking into court last week. Credit: Jason South

She put to Pesutto, in cross-examination, that he was not following the basis of the rule of law through this process as a trained lawyer and as a member of the Liberal Party.

“I wasn’t [doing this as] a lawyer, I was the leader of the opposition, the alternative premier, there were many other considerations,” Pesutto told the court.

“As a trained lawyer, and as a member of the Liberal Party, you prescribe, don’t you, to the rule of law?” Chrysanthou asked.

“Of course,” Pesutto replied.

“It’s part of the Liberal Party constitution isn’t it?” Chrysanthou continued. “As a politician, as a leader, as a person who was legally trained, you understood in March 2023 that cutting and pasting part of an article without context to make serious allegations was wholly inadequate, wasn’t it?”

Pesutto rejected that.

“It was unfair of you,” Chrysanthou said.

“I reject that,” Pesutto replied.

Matthew Collins, KC, earlier today told the court that this was not an unfair dismissal claim.