‘Lying through her teeth’: Lisa Wilkinson’s texts describing Liberal senator Linda Reynolds
Lisa Wilkinson sent a text message describing Liberal senator Linda Reynolds as “lying through her teeth”, a court has been told.
Breaking News
Don't miss out on the headlines from Breaking News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Lisa Wilkinson described Liberal senator Linda Reynolds as “lying through her teeth”, text messages have revealed, as she denied losing her objectivity over the Brittany Higgins story, a court has been told.
Ms Wilkinson is giving evidence as she and Network 10 defend their high-stakes defamation battle with Bruce Lehrmann over her February 15, 2021 interview with Brittany Higgins on The Project.
During the broadcast, Ms Higgins alleged that she was raped by Mr Lehrmann in senator Linda Reynolds’ office in Parliament House after a night out drinking in the early hours of March 23, 2019.
Mr Lehrmann has consistently denied having any sexual contact with her that morning and argues that the interview was defamatory.
Ms Wilkinson finished her two days in the witness box on Friday afternoon following several terse exchanges with Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson SC.
‘LYING THROUGH HER TEETH’
Ms Higgins’ interview with The Project went to air on February 15, 2021; however, the story was broken earlier in the day by news.com.au journalist Samantha Maiden.
That afternoon, Ms Maiden’s story was discussed in question time.
The court was told that at 2.46pm, Ms Wilkinson texted The Project producer Angus Llewellyn, saying: “Have you been watching Question Time, lots of focus on the story, Penny Wong magnificent, (Linda) Reynolds lying through her teeth.”
Ms Wilkinson on Friday told the court that she could not remember what she was responding to when she sent the text message.
“Ms Wilkinson, I want to suggest in a contest between Reynolds and Higgins, you were always going to believe Ms Higgins no matter the evidence, do you agree or disagree?” Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson SC asked.
“Untrue,” Ms Wilkinson responded.
“You could not be objective, I suggest, in terms of making a fair assessment of the evidence concerning the role of Linda Reynolds in this affair?” Mr Richardson said.
“I disagree,” Ms Wilkinson said.
It prompted Justice Michael Lee to interject and ask how Ms Wilkinson formed the view that Ms Reynolds was “lying through her teeth”.
“I’m sorry, Your Honour, I don’t know what I was viewing when I said that,” Ms Wilkinson said.
A SERIOUS SEXUAL ELEMENT
Ms Wilkinson was later given a copy of Hansard from senate question time from the day and asked to identify the part which led her to claim Senator Reynolds was “lying through her teeth”.
Ms Wilkinson told the court: “Senator Reynolds says ‘at the time of the initial meeting with my staff member, I was not aware of the details or the circumstances of the alleged incident in my office. Had I known I would have conducted the meeting elsewhere.”
The court has heard that Ms Reynolds and her chief of staff, Fiona Brown, held a meeting with Ms Higgins in April 2019 in the room where Ms Higgins claimed the alleged sexual assault occurred.
“So what was the information that you had in your possession as of 2.46pm on the 15th of February 2021, which was the relevant time, by which you assert that part of the exchange in the parliament, to which you’ve referred, represented her lying through her teeth?” Justice Lee asked.
“I believed Ms Higgins, putting together all of the conversations I’d had with her, that Ms Reynolds absolutely knew there was a serious sexual element (to the allegation) that existed prior to that meeting on the Monday,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“MUCH LOVE, DAVID SHARAZ”
Ms Wilkinson told the court it was “odd” that Ms Higgins’ fiance David Sharaz signed off an email to her with “much love”.
The court has heard that Mr Sharaz acted as a go-between for The Project and Ms Higgins.
“You considered, at this stage, that when you’re having these interactions with Ms Higgins, that she was especially vulnerable,” Justice Michael Lee asked
“Yes,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Because of that vulnerability, would you accept that you have to be especially careful to make sure people in the situation of vulnerability are not being manipulated?” Justice Lee said.
“Yes,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Speaking of your own view at the time, do you think it was a good idea to use someone like Mr Sharaz as a conduit for communications with Ms Higgins rather than deal with Ms Higgins directly to the extent that he was being used as a conduit?” Justice Lee asked.
“My preference was for Ms Higgins to be the main contact,” Ms Wilkinson said.
Justice Lee asked whether when Mr Sharaz made contact with her via email in January 2021, whether they were good friends.
Ms Wilkinson denied that was the case.
The court heard that Mr Sharaz signed off one email with: “Thanks so much, much love, David Sharaz”.
“Do you think that’s odd?” Justice Lee asked.
“Yeah, I hadn’t had contact with him,” Ms Wilkinson said.
The court has heard that Mr Sharaz will not be called as a witness.
”He was not on the scene in 2019,” Dr Matt Collins KC told the court of Ten’s decision not to call Mr Sharaz.
CARTOONISH VILLAINY
Ms Wilkinson has denied that she should have pressed Ms Higgins during their interview over claims that senator Michaelia Cash told her “you’re just going to have to sort of suck it up”.
The court was told that during the program, Ms Wilkinson asked: “Did Minister Cash have any words of advice on how you should deal with the trauma that you were going through?”
“Yeah. I was having difficulties actually coming through the entrance of Parliament House,” Ms Higgins responded.
“It was that, that same entrance where the incident happened and so I felt, every time I’d walk through it I’d get quite panicky and I sort of, I said that I was having difficulties just coming in.
“And at that point she was like ‘well you, you’re just going to have to sort of suck it up’ essentially.
“And it was, it’s that same idea of ‘you deal with it, or you leave’.”
Mr Richardson asked whether Ms Higgins’ remarks gave an “impression of callousness” on the part of Senator Cash.
“Yes, I feel that that is coloured by Ms Higgins’ very firm belief that when the Canberra Times made inquiries as to Ms Higgins and a sexual assault occurring, that she felt a level of betrayal,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“When you say coloured, does that mean that you suspect that those words were not actually said?” Mr Richardson asked.
“I think that’s why she said those words,” Ms Wilkinson said.
When it was asked whether it was unlikely that Senator Cash said those words, Ms Wilkinson said: “I wasn’t in the room at the time.”
“It’s cartoonish villainy, isn’t it, the way it’s portrayed there?” Mr Richardson asked.
“I wasn’t in the room at the time. I disagree,” Ms Wilkinson said.
Mr Richardson suggested it was unreasonable for Ms Wilkinson not to challenge Ms Higgins’ allegations about Senator Cash.
“I disagree,” she said.
‘I DESCRIBE MYSELF AS A JOURNALIST’
Ms Wilkinson on Thursday clashed with Mr Richardson over questions that she said portrayed her as a “cheap tabloid journalist”.
Earlier on Thursday, Ms Wilkinson was questioned about a photo that Ms Higgins provided of a bruise on her thigh.
At the time, Ms Higgins claimed she he had suffered the bruise during the alleged assault.
However, during her evidence to the Federal Court, Ms Higgins conceded the bruise may have been suffered when she fell on the stairs at a bar earlier in the night.
The court was told that Ms Higgins provided The Project producer Angus Llewellyn with a screenshot of the photo rather than giving him the original.
Mr Lehrmann’s legal team has argued that because the photo was a copy, it did not contain metadata that would have established when the picture was taken.
Asked on Thursday if she should have looked at the metadata, to establish the veracity of the picture, Ms Wilkinson said: “I didn’t know what metadata was at that point.”
Ms Wilkinson was on Friday asked about two tweets in 2015 in which she said: “The moment an Assistant Federal Minister threatens to go through a journalist’s metadata. Is that meant to be funny?” and “Sorry, over 300,000 requests for #metadata are being made a year? How many are being approved? And who is arbitrating? #qanda”.
Mr Richardson pressed Ms Wilkinsonon whether she knew in 2021 what metadata was.
“What we talked about the other day were the specifics of a photo having information on it about when it was taken,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Looking at this, I think my understanding at that point was talking about phone logs and emails and things like search histories on browsers.
“I didn’t know that photos had metadata.”
Mr Richardson continued: “Ms Wilkinson, you describe yourself as a serious investigative journalist.”
“I describe myself as a journalist,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Well, you were emphatic yesterday that you were not a tabloid journalist. I take it to mean that you describe yourself therefore as a serious investigative journalist,” Mr Richardson said.
“I describe myself as a journalist, Mr Richardson,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“I suggest to you as a journalist of about 40 years experience in 2021 that it was most improbable that you did not know what metadata was,” Mr Richardson said.
“I disagree,” Ms Wilkinson said.
IDENTITY
The story about Ms Higgins’ allegations was broken by journalist Samantha Maiden on news.com.au during the day on February 15, 2021 before The Project was broadcast later that evening.
Mr Lehrmann was not named in either stories. His legal team has argued that he was identified in The Project story, which stated that the man followed Senator Reynolds from home affairs to defence industries.
The court has heard that the news.com.au story did not mention the political staffer worked for Ms Reynolds.
“You knew the additional information Ten was publishing in terms of the identifying facts would have increased the probability that he would be identified by greater numbers of people,” Mr Richardson asked.
“What I knew was that the Channel 10 legal department thought that what we were publishing, even after Ms Maiden’s article, was appropriate that it would not identify Mr Lehrmann,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“And we were still wanting Mr Lehrmann to get back to us.”
THE DEADLINE
Ms Wilkinson has denied that the program gave Mr Lehrmann insufficient time to respond to questions before it went to air on February 15, 2023.
The court has been told that producer Angus Llewellyn sent Mr Lehrmann questions via a hotmail address at 2.45pm on Friday, February 12.
Shortly after he sent a text message to a phone number, which was provided by Ms Higgins’ fiance David Sharaz.
Ms Wilkinson on Friday argued that Mr Lehrmann was given a “completely reasonable amount of time” to respond.
“I want to suggest to you that 2.45pm on a Friday with a 10am Monday (deadline) is a timeframe which would present obvious difficulties for a person in their mid 20s being accused of an allegation like that,” Mr Richardson said.
“Lawyers, like politicians and journalists, all work seven days a week,” Ms Wilkinson replied.
She also disagreed that The Project would not have been able to re-cut the program to include Mr Lehrmann’s response had he provided one.
“The Project team is an experienced team of senior, professional journalists and producers who work to very tight deadlines all the time. And knowing them as I did, I strongly believed they would have very possibly dropped one of the segments … in order to facilitate Mr Lehrmann.
“If he wanted to come into the studio, I was actually preparing questions that afternoon in the possible event Mr Lehrmann would agree to an interview.”
THE TAPE
Ms Higgins will not be recalled to the witness box after Mr Lehrmann’s lawyers subpoenaed a copy of a leaked audio recording of her lawyers speaking to her fiance.
On Tuesday night, Sky News broadcast audio of Ms Higgins’ fiancee David Sharaz speaking with lawyer Leon Zwier at the Park Hyatt hotel in Sydney last week.
On the tape, they discuss Ms Higgins’ upcoming cross-examination in the Federal Court.
Another unknown person recorded the conversation and leaked it to Sky News, the broadcaster reported in its coverage of the tape.
Mr Zwier told Sky News his comments were made on the common understanding that no one would speak to Ms Higgins about her testimony.
Sky News provided a copy of the tape to Mr Lehrmann’s legal team under subpoena.
Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steve Whybrow SC on Friday told the court that he had tried to transcribe the 52-minute recording.
“The quality of that 52-minute recording that was provided is not sufficient for us to be able to in the time available do anything more with it,” Mr Whybrow said.
Mr Whybrow told the court that no application would be made related to the tape.
Justice Michael Lee told the court that a number of applications could have been made, including to recall Ms Higgins or to call other witnesses.
“You don’t intend to proceed along those lines?” Justice Lee asked.
“No, Your Honour,” Mr Whybrow said.
“You don’t propose to tender the tape,” Justice Lee asked.
“No, Your Honour,” Justice Lee said.
‘CHEAP’
On her first day on the witness stand on Thursday, Ms Wilkinson angrily denied that she was riveted by the “commercial appeal” of Ms Higgins’ allegations.
The court was told that after she recorded their interview, Ms Wilkinson texted Ms Higgins, saying: “Brittany, just wanted to say thank you once again for your openness, honesty and eloquence. You did something truly magnificent today.”
Ms Wilkinson denied that she was intent on not challenging any of Ms Higgins’ assertions.
“You were thrilled by the riveting commercial appeal of the story that she told,” Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson SC said.
“Please don’t make me sound like a cheap tabloid journalist, Mr Richardson,” Ms Wilkinson said.
THE LOGIES SPEECH
Ms Wilkinson repeatedly clashed with Mr Richardson during her cross-examination on Thursday.
She was grilled about the Logies acceptance speech that she made on 19 June, 2022 – eight days before Mr Lehrmann’s ACT Supreme Court trial was due to begin.
During the speech, Ms Wilkinson said: “As Brittany warned me before we went to 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 was a political problem. And governments tend to like political problems to go away. But Brittany never did.
“And the truth is this honour belongs to Brittany. It belongs to a 26-year-old woman’s unwavering courage, it belongs to a woman who said enough’.”
The speech caused Mr Lehrmann’s trial to be delayed until October that year.
That trial ended in a mistrial due to juror misconduct before a retrial was abandoned due to concerns about Ms Higgins’ mental health.
No findings have been made against Mr Lehrmann.
Mr Richardson questioned whether Ms Wilkinson was communicating to “hundreds of thousands of people that you believe Ms Higgins’ allegations”.
“I didn’t say that in that speech, Mr Richardson,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“I want to suggest to you put your pride and your ego ahead of my client’s right to a fair trial when you gave that speech,” Mr Richardson asked.
“I completely disagree,” Ms Wilkinson said.
Justice Michael Lee asked: “Would you accept that a woman would not be demonstrating ‘unwavering courage’ if she was making a false allegation of rape against an innocent man.
“Yes, I accept that,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Doesn’t it follow if you said that if someone is showing ‘unwavering courage’, it means they’re making a true allegation of rape against a guilty man,” Justice Lee asked.
“Yes,” Ms Wilkinson said.
‘ALARM BELLS’
Ms Wilkinson was also questioned about seeming inconsistencies relating to a photo of a bruise taken by Ms Higgins.
Ms Higgins provided the photo to Mr Llewellyn during a five-hour pre-interview meeting in January, 2021 and at the time claimed it captured a bruise she suffered during the alleged sexual assault.
However, during her evidence to the Federal Court earlier in the trial, Ms Higgins conceded the bruise may have been suffered when she fell at a bar earlier that evening.
Separately, the court has been told that during the same pre-interview discussion Ms Higgins also claimed that her phone had “completely died”.
The court was told that Ms Wilkinson texted Mr Llewellyn about seeming inconsistencies in Ms Higgins’ claims that her phone had died while at the same time she still had the bruise photo.
“She no longer has critical screenshot messages,” Mr Richardson said.
“Yes, I’m raising alarm bells,” Ms Wilkinson said of her messages to Mr Llewellyn.
“But at the same time you knew she had the bruise photograph,” Mr Richardson said.
“Yes,” Ms Wilkinson said.
Mr Richardson further asked: “I want to suggest to you at this point you believed this issue presented a potential significant credibility problem for your source.”
“Correct,” Ms Wilkinson said.
The trial continues.
Originally published as ‘Lying through her teeth’: Lisa Wilkinson’s texts describing Liberal senator Linda Reynolds
US envoy heading to Israel to press for truce with Hezbollah
US envoy heading to Israel to press for truce with Hezbollah
Uganda opposition figure Besigye appears in military court
Uganda opposition figure Besigye appears in military court