Judge’s scathing findings against key players in Lehrmann drama

The judge overseeing the Bruce Lehrmann civil trial has made a series of scathing findings about the former political staffer, as well as other key players in the saga.

Bruce Lehrmann has been found to be a rapist by a Federal Court judge after the former political staffer lost his mammoth multimillion-dollar defamation trial.

However, Justice Michael Lee also made scathing findings against some of the other key players in the sordid saga.

In a landmark judgment on Monday, Justice Lee dismissed Mr Lehrmann’s lawsuit against Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson, and upheld the broadcaster’s truth defence.

In doing so, Justice Lee found — on the balance of probabilities — that Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins inside Parliament House in the early hours of March 23, 2019 after a night out drinking at two Canberra bars with colleagues.

Bruce Lehrmann leaves court after losing his defamation lawsuit. Picture: NCA NewsWire/John Appleyard

He found Lehrmann told a series of “deliberate lies” and his evidence was affected by inconsistencies, including concerning his interactions with Ms Higgins at The Dock on the evening of Friday, March 22.

During his evidence, Mr Lehrmann initially denied buying Ms Higgins two vodka drinks at the pub.

He initially told the court under cross-examination: “I don’t recall buying her two vodkas … it’s very hard to recall specifically.”

After taking a short break, Mr Lehrmann returned to the witness stand, where he said he recalled buying Ms Higgins a drink.

“After being able to take a short break … I recall going up to the bar with Ms Higgins,” Mr Lehrmann said after reviewing footage of the night.

Bruce Lehrmann lost his defamation battle with Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson. Picture: NCA Newswire / Gaye Gerard

Justice Lee said he was unsure if Lehrmann was “recklessly indifferent to the truth” or was “finding it difficult to remember”.

He noted the CCTV of their interactions at the pub was analysed with the “intensity” of the Zapruder film, the home video footage of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination.

“There was an inevitability the CCTV footage would demonstrate that he had purchased drinks for Ms Higgins and had seen her consume significant quantities of alcohol,” Justice Lee said in his decision.

He said he must have also known that: “His prior explanation for how he had paid for the drinks would not pass muster.”

“Even if one puts the best complexion on what occurred, it confirms that Mr Lehrmann’s evidence is unreliable,” Justice Lee said.

Justice Lee said that Lehrmann gave false evidence about a “litany of matters”.

“Such as being reprimanded by Senator Reynolds, the classified document security breach, as to securing entry into Parliament House, the circumstances in which he came to be accompanied by Ms Higgins when securing entry, about whisky and about his representations made to Ms Brown,” Justice Lee said.

“All these falsehoods, together with his Walter Mitty-like imaginings in skiting to Ms (Lauren) Gain about the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, demonstrate that Mr Lehrmann had no compunction about departing from the truth if he thought it expedient.”

Lisa Wilkinson. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Jane Dempster

LISA WILKINSON

Justice Lee also made adverse findings about the reliability of Ms Wilkinson.

During her evidence, Ms Wilkinson “doubled down” on allegations that and Senator Linda Reynolds and her chief of staff Fiona Brown were a part of a political “cover up” of Ms Higgins’ allegations, Justice Lee said.

“Upon any fair review of the available material, the basis for such a grave allegation is infirm,” Justice Lee said.

He said that Ms Wilkinson maintained there was a cover up “in the absence of any solid, verifiable material in her possession” and it demonstrated her “willingness to engage in speculation”.

Brittany Higgins was found to be an “unsatisfactory witness”. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Jeremy Piper

BRITTANY HIGGINS

Justice Lee also found that Ms Higgins was an “unsatisfactory witness who made some allegations that made her a heroine to one group of partisans” but also “undermined her general credibility”.

During the production of the The Project, she provided producer Angus Llewellyn with a photograph she claimed showed a bruise on her leg which she suffered during the alleged rape.

She later signed a statutory declaration to The Project stating that she suffered the bruise during the alleged sexual assault inside Parliament House.

Justice Lee said that Ms Higgins inconsistencies on the topic were “vexing”.

The court heard the photo showed a bruise on her right leg, however she said Lehrmann crushed her left leg during the alleged rape.

The bruise photograph. Picture: Seven

During the defamation trial, she admitted she may have been mistaken about how she suffered the bruise.

Justice Lee also pointed out that Ms Higgins had told Ms Wilkinson and Mr Llewellyn that the her phone had been “wiped”, yet the photo survived.

“I consider it unlikely there could be genuine confusion in Ms Higgins’ recollection as to how she got the bruise recorded in the bruise photograph given the way she and (her partner David) Sharaz deployed it in 2021 and their subjective understanding of its importance,” Justice Lee said.

Originally published as Judge’s scathing findings against key players in Lehrmann drama