Bruce Lehrmann fails to overturn rapist finding as appeal dismissed
A court has dismissed Bruce Lehrmann’s appeal against his devastating defamation suit loss to Lisa Wilkinson and Network 10.
Bruce Lehrmann has suffered another devastating defeat to Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson after his appeal against his damaging defamation suit loss in which he was found to be a rapist was dismissed.
Lehrmann sued the network and its high-profile former journalist over Brittany Higgins’ bombshell interview on The Project in February 2021, in which she alleged that she was raped by a colleague inside Parliament House.
The former Liberal staffer suffered a bruising defeat in the Federal Court when Justice Michael Lee upheld Ten’s truth defence and found - on the balance of probabilities - that Lehrmann had raped Ms Higgins in the early hours of March 23, 2019 after a night out drinking with colleagues.
He launched an appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court, and argued during a two-day hearing earlier this year that he was not afforded procedural fairness by Justice Lee.
Justices Michael Wigney, Craig Colvin and Wendy Abraham on Wednesday morning ruled in favour of Wilkinson and Ten.
They upheld Justice Lee’s judgment, in which he found that Lehrmann knew that Higgins was drunk and not consenting when they went back to the office of their then boss, Defence Minister Linda Reynolds.
Lehrmann was not present in court for the decision.
The full court’s finding went further than dismissing the appeal, finding Mr Lehrmann was aware Ms Higgins did not consent at the time of the rape.
“The full court has also accepted a contention advanced by Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson that, on the facts as found by the primary judge, His Honour should have concluded that Mr Lehrmann knew that Ms Higgins did not consent to having sexual intercourse,” Justice Wigney said on Wednesday.
“The full court has found, based on the unchallenged findings made by the primary judge, that the only reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts - known and observable to Mr Lehrmann at the time he had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins - is that Mr Lehrmann did turned his mind to whether Miss Higgins consented to sex, or was aware that she was not consenting, but proceeded nonetheless.”
Millions
It means Lehrmann now faces a massive legal bill, which he is unlikely to be able to meet.
After the Federal Court trial, Lehrmann was ordered to pay $2m for Ten and Wilkinson’s legal costs.
The court allowed him to proceed with his appeal without having to pay $200,000 surety.
At the time Ms Burrows told the court that Lehrmann was on Centrelink and unable to meet a $200,000 costs order.
Ten and Wilkinson asked for the surety to secure their legal bills for the appeal, but were denied by the court as Lehrmann was allowed to proceed with his appeal.
Having failed in his appeal, Lehrmann is now facing a whopping legal bill which includes the $2m in his opposition’s legal costs for the Federal Court trial.
It’s estimated that Ten and Wilkinson’s combined legal costs for the appeal would be up to $500,000.
Bankruptcy proceedings now loom for Lehrmann.
‘Made a new case up’
Lehrmann’s solicitor Zali Burrows argued during his appeal that Justice Lee’s findings differed from the case put forward by Ten and Wilkinson, and Ms Higgins’ evidence.
“Generally, we say Mr Lehrmann could have conducted the case differently if the version that the judge had found against Mr Lehrmann had been put to him at the beginning,” Ms Burrows told the hearing earlier this year
“It was asserted against Mr Lehrmann … that he violently raped, that it was done in a violent nature.
“Whereas His Honour found a totally different case as if it was, using the phrase, a soft rape.”
She further asserted that Justice Lee: “made a new case up”.
Going back for his hat
Justice Lee found that Lehrmann more than likely knew that Higgins was drunk when he went with her to their then-boss Senator Linda Reynolds’ office after drinking at an ‘80s-themed bar.
He found that Lehrmann was “hell-bent” on having sex with Higgins and had been mutually kissing her earlier in the night.
“In his pursuit of gratification, he did not care one way or another whether Ms Higgins understood or agreed to what was going on,” Justice Lee said in his judgment.
Justice Lee remarked: “Having escaped the lions’ den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat.”
It was a reference to the fact that Lehrmann faced trial in the ACT Supreme Court but the proceedings were abandoned due to juror misconduct.
The charges were later dropped due to concern for Higgins’ welfare.
Lehrmann has persistently denied that any sexual contact with Higgins took place and that when they entered the Defence Minister’s office, he went one way and she went another and did not see her again that night.
‘Astonishing’
During the appeal hearing earlier this year, Ten’s barrister Dr Matt Collins KC attacked the argument that Lehrmann may have given different evidence had he been aware of what Justice Lee’s findings might be.
He said the argument was “astonishing” given that he has persistently claimed that he did not have sex with Higgins.
“There were only two people in the room,” Dr Collins said.
“But (Ms Burrows) said Mr Lehrmann’s evidence might have been different.
“That’s, with respect, an astonishing submission.”
He argued that Ms Burrows’ argument could only be true if consent was in question.
Originally published as Bruce Lehrmann fails to overturn rapist finding as appeal dismissed
