‘Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins’: Judge’s bombshell trial decision
Justice Michael Lee has found that Bruce Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019, stressing that this was a civil trial, and not a criminal one.
Bruce Lehrmann has lost his defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson, following the bombshell finding that he raped Brittany Higgins in Parliament House in 2019.
Justice Michael Lee handed down his judgement on Monday, finding the pair did have sexual intercourse in the office of Senator Linda Reynolds and Ms Higgins did not consent.
Follow our live coverage below for the latest updates.
Lehrmann leaves court
After Justice Lee delivered his decision, a shell-shocked Mr Lehrmann marched through the media pack outside court without making any comment.
As he made his way from Federal Court, journalists shouted questions but he remained silent.
“Do you stand by your version of events?” one reporter asked.
“What do you say to the judge? Do you accept these findings?” another asked.
Mr Lehrmann marched silently through the crowd towards his lawyer’s chambers.
Earlier, Mr Lehrmann made comprehensive notes in the courtroom.
His lawyers did not make any statements and have not yet been asked if they will consider an appeal.
Justice Lee said that Mr Lehrmann was not eligible for any damages.
Lisa Wilkinson reads statement outside court
Outside the court, former Project host Lisa Wilkinson read from a short statement and did not take questions.
“I published a true story about a rape in a Federal Minister’s office at Parliament in March of 2019,’’ she said.
“I sincerely hope this judgement gives strength to women around the country.”
Ms Wilkinson said she was “so grateful to have had the benefit of my independent legal team led by Sue Chrysanthou”.
She also thanked her family and members of the public who had offered support.
‘Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins’
“Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins,” Justice Lee found.
“I hasten to add these findings are on the balance of probabilities. These findings should not be misconstrued or mischaracterised.”
In handing down his judgement, Justice Lee stressed that this was a civil trial, and not a criminal one.
Judge reveals Lehrmann’s ‘mistake’
Justice Lee concluded his judgement by revealing the big “mistake” made by Mr Lehrmann in relation to the proceedings.
“Having escaped the lion’s den Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of coming back for his hat,” he said.
Mr Lehrmann’s criminal trial in the ACT Supreme Court was abandoned in October 2022 following juror misconduct.
The former Liberal staffer has continually denied raping Ms Higgins in Parliament House in 2019.
Brittany Higgins rape claims had ‘ring of truth’
Justice Lee has found that Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann had sex and that she did not consent.
The Federal Court Judge announced his decision today at 1.10pm.
He said that although “he was not satisfied there was a clear verbal protest being made by Ms Higgins”, the suggestion some form of active resistance was required to determine consent was misguided,’ he said.
“But in the end, it comes down to my assessment that Ms Higgins was telling the truth in the witness box,’’ he said.
“Notwithstanding the cautions to which I’ve referred, the range of other possibilities combined, and taking all my reservations as to the credibility and reliability of Ms Higgins.”
He said that he found on the balance of probability that sex occurred.
“I’m satisfied that Mr Lehrmann’s state of mind was such that he was so intent upon gratification to be indifferent to consent,’’ Justice Lee said.
“In his pursuit of gratification, he did not care one way or the other whether Ms Higgins understood or agreed with what was going on.”
Her evidence, he said, “struck me forcibly” as credible and having the ring of truth.”
‘Sexual intercourse did take place’
Justice Lee has found that Mr Lehrmann had sex with Ms Higgins at Parliament House in March, 2019.
“I’m convinced however that sexual intercourse did take place and it took place with Mr Lehrmann on top of her on the couch in the minister’s office,” he said.
Justice Lee is now moving to the question of consent.
‘Brittany hooked up with Bruce’
Justice Lee has found that Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann “hooked up” at the 88mph nightclub and kissed in front of a female witness.
He has accepted the evidence of former Liberal staffer Lauren Gain that they kissed.
He found that Mr Lehrmann was attracted to Ms Higgins and had placed his hands on her thighs in the nightclub.
“He was a man who had already acted unfaithfully towards his girlfriend and by the standards of right thinking people, and had no scruples … doing so that evening,’’ Justice Lee said.
“Like most young men, he must have known that excessive alcohol consumption leads to impaired judgement and lowered inhibitions.
“Fifthly, he could not go to his (girlfriend’s) place for obvious reasons, and if he wanted to continue to be intimate with Ms Higgins. He knew this was best at a place he could access and where they could be alone. Of course, he knew such things as the minister’s office at Parliament House.”
He also found that it was likely Ms Higgins had more to drink at the nightclub and was affected by alcohol.
“One thing did emerge with clarity from the evidence with certainly … is that Brittany hooked up with Bruce,’’ Justice Lee said.
“I’m amply satisfied that I reject the evidence of Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins which was inconsistent with the account of Lauren Gain.”
He then noted Ms Gain’s evidence, that “they were quite close, touching. Hands were on her thighs and her hands were on his thighs and they were engaged in a passionate kiss”.
“He was a 23-year-old male cheating on his girlfriend having just hooked up with a woman he found sexually attractive,” Justice Lee said.
He said that commonsense suggests there was one dominant thought running through Mr Lehrmann’s mind “and it had nothing to do with French submarine contracts”.
Mr Lehrmann’s has previously given evidence that he was doing work on Question Time briefs relating to the defence industry ministry.
Coffee and emails with Bruce Lehrmann
Justice Lee said he rejected so-called rape myths about how an alleged victim should behave regarding the evidence that Ms Higgins accepting a cup of coffee from Mr Lehrmann or exchanged emails the following Monday.
“I have little doubt that if she had been raped, that by the time of these interactions, it’s quite conceivable that Ms Higgins would have be driven by conflicting emotions self doubt, concern she would be humiliated by word leaking out to her colleagues and the question about the prudence of the behaviour.”
Brittany Higgins ‘seriously inebriated’
Justice Lee has found that Ms Higgins was seriously affected by alcohol on the night of the alleged incident.
The judge also said he “strongly suspected” that they drank more when they got back to Parliament House.
“He knew she was drinking excessively,” Justice Lee said.
“I accept Ms Gain’s evidence that Ms Higgins fell over and Mr Lehrmann helped her back to her feet. It must have been obvious to anyone that had seen or been party to this incident that alcohol consumption had decreased Ms Higgins’ motor co-ordination.
“Whatever may have been (her) precise BAC (blood alcohol concentration) she was seriously inebriated.
“I’m comfortably satisfied that Ms Higgins was a very drunk 24 year old woman and her cognitive abilities were significantly impacted, given the state as she was prone to drowsiness.”
Higgins’ account of rape ‘not inherently implausible’
Justice Lee has not yet ruled on whether or not he finds Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins.
He is now assessing Ms Higgins’ account of the alleged rape against her credit issues.
“The first thing to be said about Ms Higgins’ account is that it involves a grave allegation by a witness of with general credibility problems,’’ he said.
He ran through the evidence of a colleague in the days afterwards that, when asked directly if she was raped, that Ms Higgins said “it would have been f**king a log” and that she could not have “consented”.
He then referred to a recording of Ms Higgins in conversation with news.com.au when she learned in August, 2021, that Mr Lehrmann would plead guilty and said nothing sexual occurred.
Justice Lee said this was significant.
“It’s worth recalling her almost ebullient reaction when told the news by (news.com.au political editor Samantha) Maiden that Mr Lehrmann was going to say nothing happened,’’ Justice Lee said.
“She said, ‘I thought we were going to have this very nuanced debate about consent and alcohol’.”
Bruce Lehrmann’s account an ‘elaborate fancy’
“I’ve already said enough to indicate that I consider Mr Lehrmann’s account to be elaborate fancy,” Justice Lee said.
He was being accompanied by a woman who he found attractive, he found, who had just been kissing in a nightclub.
He rejected the idea that he was “taking her to a private place very late to just say cheerio and then soberly proceed to note question time briefs”.
“Why would Mr Lehrmann just bolt from the office after attending to his task without attempting to extend the courtesy of checking whether she was there?” he said.
Justice Lee said Mr Lehrmann had initially told his chief of staff Fiona Brown he came back to drink Whiskey.
“It’s also unsurprising Mr Lehrmann made his spontaneous and telling comment to (chief of staff) Ms Brown a couple of days later when asked ‘what else did you do in the office’ that he said, ‘Didn’t want to get into that’.”
Judge rejects criticism of Parliament House security guards
Justice Lee has rejected any criticism of the security guards for letting Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins into Parliament.
“Anyone with the life experience of being in pubs frequently would understand that drunk people are often able to compose themselves with fleeting or short interactions,’’ he said.
He said it is “often difficult to form an immediate and accurate view of a person” without having extended contact with that person.
“I have little doubt that what happened with staff obtaining entry that night was no different than what would happen if staff presented themselves in any way at entry points of countless professional officers throughout the day,” Justice Lee said.
“On the information that security guards had available to them, they had no concerns that something untoward was going to happen.”
Justice Lee said the security guards were simply conscientiously trying to do their jobs.
Spotlight producer Mark Llewellyn ‘no longer works for the Network’
While Justice Lee continues to deliver his judgement, Network Seven has officially confirmed that Spotlight executive producer Mark Llewellyn “no longer works” for the company.
“For the avoidance of doubt I wanted to update you with this statement from a Seven spokesperson,” Seven said in a statement, acknowledging that Justice Lee was delivering his judgement today.
“Mark Llewellyn no longer works for the Seven Network,’’ a spokesperson said.
The boss of the current affairs program was not aware of the misuse of the credit card by his employee Taylor Auerbach but also reportedly did not accept his resignation when it was offered.
Questions have also been raised over how Seven responded to subpoenas in the Federal Court.
Seven’s outgoing commercial director Bruce McWilliam said the 20 pages of accounting records documenting payments Auerbach claimed had benefited Mr Lehrmann “predate Seven’s exclusivity agreement with Mr Lehrmann and were not the basis of consideration at the time”.
“Given Mr Llewellyn’s status as executive producer, I had no reason to doubt his indication that no written or electronic communications with Mr Lehrmann existed,” he wrote.
Ten did not behave ‘reasonably’
Justice Lee has found that Ten and Wilkinson did not behave reasonably in reporting on Ms Higgins’ allegations in four respects.
This relates to the defence of qualified privilege, that concerns whether the conduct of Ten and Wilkinson in publishing the matter in its character of conveying the defamatory imputations of rape.
The broadcast, Justice Lee said, “fell short of the standard of reasonableness”.
The first he found related to the claim of a cover up.
“Summarising them … the rape allegations were intertwined with a cover up,” he said.
Brittany Higgins’ claim that she’d lost material on her phone and selected materials survived was “implausible” and should have been “a flashing warning light”, Justice Lee said.
Earlier, Justice Lee found that Mr Lehrmann was identified by the broadcast.
This is crucial to the success or otherwise of his defamation claim as he was not named in the broadcast.
Lisa Wilkinson’s ‘woman of courage’ Logies speech slammed
Justice Lee has slammed the “lack of judgement” in Wilkinson’s Logies speech, notwithstanding the legal advice from Channel 10.
He has also criticised the TV star.
“The action in giving the speech was not … a case of Ms Wilkinson going off on a frolic and irresponsibly saying something off the top of her head,’’ Justice Lee said.
“She was sufficiently prudent to seek advice.”
Justice Lee said she was badly let down by those to whom she turned for counsel.
“But although the reality of this advice and encouragement provides important context, Ms Wilkinson … had over 40 years experience. She gave evidence, she was appointed a member of the Order of Australia in 2016 for, among other things, services to broadcast and print journalism,” he said.
If she had thought matters through “as an experienced journalist and less as a champion (for Ms Higgins)” Justice Lee said she ought to recognise it was “fraught with danger”.
“The speech was part of a continuum of conduct of Ms Wilkinson celebrating and lending credence to Miss Higgins as a woman of courage whose story must be believed,” Justice Lee said.
Fiona Brown praised for standing up to Linda Reynolds
Justice Lee has praised Ms Higgins’ former boss Fiona Brown for her “integrity” in standing up to Defence Industry Minister Linda Reynolds’ demands in 2019 that she report an alleged rape to police against Ms Higgins’ wishes. Ms Brown was then chief of staff to Senator Reynolds.
In assessing her evidence, Justice Lee said that Ms Brown “struck me as the archetype of a successful professional administrator of a certain age and disposition”.
“She had a conservative outlook and conducted herself in a careful and generally risk averse way,” he said.
“Despite having your health seriously affected by allegations of shameful conduct, and like the other principal actors, experienced a torrent of social media abuse, she gave evidence calmly and was responsive to questions.
“One aspect of her evidence was particularly striking. Ms Brown facing sustained pressure from her Minister … to report the incident to the AFP, even though she was then unsure an allegation was being made of rape and irrespective of the wishes of Ms Higgins.
“She was not someone to speculate or jump to conclusions and I reject any suggestion Ms Higgins expressly said to Ms Brown at either the first or second meeting that she had been raped or sexually assaulted.”
Justice Lee noted that Ms Higgins had told news.com.au of his meetings with Ms Brown that she did not expressly use the word rape.
“I don’t know I think for the longest time I was really weird about actually saying it was rape,” Ms Higgins said.
“She adopted the more cautious view that sex on something untoward may have happened,’’ Justice Lee said of Ms Brown’s assessment of what had occurred.
“But what does not reflect caution was standing up to her Minister and the Chief of Staff of another minister. When Ms Brown thought that they (were) intent on protecting their own interests at the expense of allowing a young woman to make her own decision as to whether she would involve the police, even at some risk to her.”
Bruise photo ‘concerns’
Justice Lee has raised a number of concerns about the “odd” circumstances of the bruise photograph and the lack of metadata to date when the image was captured.
“The third aspect of the post 2019 conduct causing concern relates to Ms Higgins bruise photograph,” Justice Lee said.
The bruise photograph was provided to The Project and recorded in Ms Higgins’ statutory declaration to the program as a record of an injury suffered during the rape and “hence been contemporaneous documentary evidence supporting her accusation”.
“Indeed, as we will see at the beginning of the first meeting with The Project, the photograph is raised specifically by Mr Sharaz and Ms Higgins as the only evidence …(against it being) one person’s word against another,” he said.
“It’s forensic importance is manifest and while she was under an obligation to tell the truth it was put forward by her as corroborative material.”
The inconsistencies on this topic Justice Lee said were “both important and vexing”.
“As we know the original photograph, despite its obvious importance, was not mentioned or provided to the AFP in 2019,’’ Justice Lee said.
“This is despite Ms Higgins meeting a few days after the bruise photograph was supposedly taken with highly experienced AFP sexual assault investigators sensitively asking her for any relevant information over a lengthy period in the presence of a sexual assault counsellor, providing her with support.
“Further, the metadata of the original photograph has never been produced. The earliest record of the bruise or the photograph is in 2021.”
Justice Lee on Brittany Higgins
Justice Lee has not yet made a finding on the truth defence. But he has said that some of Ms Higgins’ behaviour in 2019, was potentially consistent was a sexual assault victim.
However, he has sharply criticised her over the suggestion there was some sort of cover up by the Federal Government of a crime and he has included her partner David Sharaz in this criticism.
“In the febrile atmosphere 2021, many instinctively believe what Ms Higgins asserted about the rape and the subsequent cover up of the crime, in advance of any trial where the rape allegation would be examined,” Justice Lee said.
He said this led to the situation where she was feted by many, becoming a celebrated speaker at a mass demonstration, becoming nominated for awards, receiving invitations to make a nationally televised speech at the National Press Club and securing a book deal with Penguin Random House apparently worth $325,000.
Justice Lee said that it was necessary to assess the credit of Ms Higgins circumspectly.
“She is someone who has had the intense and critical support of some but it’s also been the subject of widespread social media abuse,” he said.
Like Mr Lehrmann, he said he was “conscious that giving evidence would have been a daunting and stressful experience” for Ms Higgins.
“As to reliability … one must take account of the well known features of human memory, but also the mental state of Ms Higgins and the well known specific effect of trauma and in particular sexual assault on her memory,” Justice Lee said.
“This submission has mirrored up to a point and it does inform my consideration of important indeed critical aspects of Ms Higgins evidence.
“But as I will explain, I’m comfortably satisfied that a number of the credit issues arising from a fair assessment of Ms Higgins cannot be minimised in this way.
“There is a significant difference between the distortions of Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins, in the case of Mr Lehrmann the untruths were all over the shop, being a form of what might be described as disorganised line, whereas the untruth of Ms Higgins can be placed in two temporal categories.
“That was to paint aspects of conduct in a better light at a time when she did not wish to pursue a complaint by 2021, and afterwards, most were part of a broader narrative or theme that she and her boyfriend wished others to believe and it appears others wanted to believe.”
Lehrmann’s ‘false representations to the court’ over leaks
Justice Lee has determined that Mr Lehrmann was “less than candid” about the benefits he received to participate in the Spotlight program.
He has also found that the former Liberal staffer had caused his lawyers to give assurances to the court that he did not leak documents to Spotlight that appeared to be false.
Material obtained in this way is protected by the so-called Harman undertaking. The Harman undertaking is implied and binds parties to court proceedings and prohibits the use of material for a collateral or ulterior purpose, unless released by the court from the undertaking, tendered in open court or admitted into evidence.
“Notwithstanding the fact that I’m not some sort of roving law enforcement official and that any alleged breach of the Harman street obligation, if it is to be pursued, will not be by me and will not be by this court, I’m satisfied that Mr Lehrmann made or caused to be made false representations as to the topic of providing access to documents,’’ Justice Lee found.
Bruce Lehrmann’s ‘deliberate lies’
Litigant Bruce Lehrmann is watching on in the Federal Court as Justice Lee makes findings on his credit as a witness and prone to “Walter Mitty like imaginings”.
Justice Lee said he was not convinced Mr Lehrmann was a compulsive liar but that he had told “deliberate lies”.
“Network 10 described Mr Lehrmann as a fundamentally dishonest man prepared to say or do anything he perceived to advance his interests,’’ Justice Lee observed.
“Senior Counsel for Lisa Wilkinson described him as an active and deliberate liar and wondered aloud whether Mr Lehrmann is just a compulsive liar.
“A falsehood told by witness will be especially serious if the maker is under a legal obligation to tell the truth.
“But irrespective of legal obligation there are gradations of seriousness of untruths. That untruthful person may be, may just be, all mouth and trousers, or maybe recklessly indifferent to the truth or by way of compulsion.
“I don’t think that Mr Lehrmann is a compulsive liar and some of the untruths you told during his evidence may sometimes have been due to careless hairlessness and confusion.
“But I am satisfied that important respects you told deliberate lies. I would not accept anything he said except …(if it was) corroborated by contemporaneous document or a witness, whose evidence, I accept.”
Lehrmann a poor witness, Brittany Higgins evidence unsatisfactory
“To remark that Mr Lehrmann is a poor witness, is an exercise of understatement,” Justice Lee said.
“His attachment to the truth was a tenuous one informed not by faithfulness to his affirmation, but by fashioning his responses in what he perceived to be his forensic interests.
“Ms Brittany Higgins … was also an unsatisfactory witness.”
Cover-up claims
“As we will see, when examined properly and without partiality, the cover-up allegation was objectively short on facts, but long on speculation and internal inconsistencies,” Justice Lee said.
“It (was) like trying to grab a column of smoke.
“But despite its logical and evidentiary flaws, (Ms) Higgins’ boyfriend selected and then contacted two journalists and in the sequence advanced her account to them and through them to others.
“From the first moment the cover-up component was promoted and recognised as the most important part of that narrative, the various controversies traceable to its publication resulted in the legal challenge of determining what happened late one night in 2019, becoming much more difficult than otherwise would be the case.”
Judgement resumes after technical issues
Justice Lee has resumed his judgment at 10.53am quipping that he was worried the court was going to have to call back a lip reader who has previously given evidence.
“I think I got up to the point where I said omnishambles,” he said.
“I was going to ask you, Dr Collins. Perhaps we should recall Mr Reedy, that the lip reader.
Justice Lee said that he had not written his judgment for people who had already made up their minds, regardless of the facts.
“An astute observer would have gleaned from the trial that this case is not as straightforward as some commentary might suggest,” he said.
“In part, this is because the primary defence hinges on the truth of an allegation of sexual assault behind closed doors.
“Only one man and one woman know the truth with certitude.”
Some, Justice Lee said, had “a Rorschach test-like response to this controversy and fastened doggedly upon the truth as they perceive it”.
“Their responses are visceral because the truth is revealed and be claimed rather than proven and explained,” he said.
“Some jumped to predetermined conclusions because they are disposed to be sceptical about complaints of sexual assault, and hold stereotype beliefs about the expected behaviour of rape victims described by social scientists as rape myths.
“Others say they believe all women, surrendering their critical faculties.”
Court hit with technical difficulties
Court has been adjourned briefly due to audio issues with the Federal Court’s YouTube stream.
Shortly after Justice Lee began speaking the audio on the stream cut out.
He has decided to restart his judgement after the YouTube link was muted for thousands of people who logged on to watch.
“We have experienced some technical difficulties. Will advise re a resumption,’’ a Federal Court spokesman said.
Justice Lee had started delivering his judgement, revealing that the final judgement is 324 pages long. It will be published on the federal court website immediately.
“But given the public interest in the case I intend to attempt to provide an oral overview of my findings,’’ he said.
“It is a singular case, the underlying controversy has become a cause célèbre. It might be more fitting to describe it as an omnishambles.”
After making that pronouncement, the Federal Court YouTube link, being watched by 30,000 people, went mute.
‘Unreliable historians’
Before he suspended the hearing due to technical issues, Justice Lee observed that, regarding the allegations, only “one man and one woman know the truth with certitude” but he suggested the key witnesses in the trial are “unreliable historians”.
“For more than a few this has become a proxy for broader cultural and political conflicts,” Justice Lee said.
“An astute observer would have gleaned from the trial this case is not as straightforward as some might suggest.
“Only one man and one woman know the truth with certitude,” but he added that in this case there were “two people who are both in different ways unreliable historians”.
“People give unreliable evidence for various reasons and distinguishing between a false memory and a lie can be difficult.”
Lehrmann arrives in court
Earlier this morning, litigant Bruce Lehrmann arrived at court for judgment day wearing a black suit and RM Williams boots accompanied by his barrister Steve Whybrow SC.
A grim-faced Mr Lehrmann made his way through a scrum of reporters towards the courtroom as more than 29,000 Australians logged on to YouTube for the verdict.
The Project presenter Lisa Wilkinson arrived in an all-white trouser suit accompanied by her lawyer Sue Chrysanthou SC.
Also in attendance was Brittany Higgins barrister Nicholas Owens SC and Network Ten barrister Matthew Collins KC.
Allegations of cocaine and sex workers
During the trial, Auerbach outlined what he said happened when he attended the Meriton in Sydney’s CBD in January, 2023, at a time when he was “building rapport” with Mr Lehrmann in the hope of securing an exclusive interview with him for Spotlight.
He said that over dinner, the ex-Liberal staffer had purchased a bag of cocaine.
“When we got upstairs to the room, (Lehrmann) pulled it out and started to put it on a plate and then started talking to me about a prospective Spotlight story and his desire to order prostitutes to the Meriton that night and began googling series of websites to try and make that happen,’’ Auerbach said.
“And during that conversation he agreed to be in a Spotlight interview, as long as we didn’t ask him about what happened on the night in Canberra.”
Auerbach told the court he told Mr Lehrmann he didn’t have the money to pay for the drugs or sex workers at the night at the Meriton. He told the court Mr Lehrmann said he would pay.
The producer said he contacted his boss, Spotlight senior producer Steve Jackson and said he was worried given the previous events with the Thai masseuse.
Auerbach said he recalled texting Jackson that “Bruce was on the warpath again”.
“This is f*cked,’’ he said.
Lehrmann ‘spiralled’ the night Project aired
Mr Lehrmann revealed during the trial that he “spiralled” and turned to cocaine on the night The Project interview with Ms Higgins aired telling mates “need bags”.
The revelation first emerged during the initial hearings in March after Mr Lehrmann was subpoenaed for his phone and the Federal Court then published some messages between Mr Lehrmann and his ex-friend John Macgowan.
But Mr Lehrmann himself didn’t get asked about the exchange until November when Ten’s barrister Matt Collins KC asked Mr Lehrmann if he was talking about cocaine in the messages.
“I was in a bad place,’’ Mr Lehrmann said.
“You decided to spend some time that night with some friends and that substance,’’ Dr Collins asked.
“Yes, Dr Collins. I spiralled pretty quickly,’’ Mr Lehrmann replied.
The barrister for Ten then asked if he asked for friends to bring drugs.
“Sorry. Your reaction to spiralling was to ask for cocaine to be … to have cocaine brought to you?”
Mr Lehrmann: “I was in a bad place. Yes.”
Lehrmann’s $100k rent deal with Channel 7’s Spotlight
Court documents revealed Mr Lehrmann’s “confidential” Seven deal initially included an agreement to pay thousands of dollars in rent — for a year — in exchange for his exclusive interview with Liam Bartlett and Spotlight.
However, the deal was “confidential” and dependent on him not providing interviews or documents to other media outlets.
Under the agreement, Mr Lehrmann also agreed to provide “all information, documents, video and photographs” reasonably requested by Seven.
However, Mr Lehrmann told the Federal Court he did not do this and only provided an interview.
Over the period of the contract, the deal would be worth $100,000 in exchange for his two sit-down interviews.
The signed agreement was executed in April, 2021, prior to Seven insisting “no one was paid” for the interview but that some accommodation was provided during filming.
A rental invoice, dated 7 June, 2023, from L’Abode Accommodation Specialist, outlines an agreement between 13 April, 2023 and 12 April, 2024.