‘Shower of s**t’: Lisa Wilkinson’s husband’s praise for Ten’s lawyers over Logies mess
Lisa Wilkinson’s husband Peter FitzSimons has some choice words after the fallout from the TV star’s Logies speech.
Lisa Wilkinson’s husband Peter FitzSimons praised Network Ten’s legal team for getting his wife through a “shower of s**t” after Ten’s lawyer assured her the Logies speech was “all good”, the Federal Court has been told.
The emails are detailed in new documents released by the Federal Court on Tuesday.
The Ten lawyer who Wilkinson says told her the Logies speech “all good” has confirmed to the Federal Court that she did advise Wilkinson the speech was “okay”.
Network 10’s head of litigation Tasha Smithies told the Federal Court however that she did not accept that advice had exposed Wilkinson to public criticism.
She has denied trying to protect her own reputation by not revealing the circumstances publicly previously, despite Wilkinson’s claims she was “begging” Ten to reveal the legal advice.
During a tense cross examination, Wilkinson’s barrister Michael Elliott SC grilled Ms Smithies over her conduct in a hearing into the television presenter’s decision to hire her own legal team.
Central to Wilkinson’s decision was the advice that Ten gave her that the speech was “okay” and Ten’s refusal to detail this legal advice publicly.
Ms Smithies conceded under cross examination that she was shown the speech and did not tell Wilkinson not to deliver it.
“Ms Wilkinson read you the speech?” Mr Elliott SC asked.
“But she did more than that? She showed you the draft of the speech on her iPad, correct?”
“Yes. She did,” Ms Smithies replied.
“And you advised her that the speech was okay?”
“Yes,” Ms Smithies replied.
“You understood she was relying on you to advise her if that was not the case?” Mr Elliott SC asked.
“Yes,’’ Ms Smithies replied.
“You understood that she was relying on you to warn her if there were any risks associated with the speech?”
“Yes,’’ she replied.
“And you didn’t?”
“No, I didn’t,” she replied.
“You accept you should have?” Wilkinson’s barrister asked.
“I do not accept that,” Ms Smithies replied.
She then rejected the claim her conduct had exposed the television presenter to criticism.
“I don’t believe the advice exposed her to public criticism,” Ms Smithies said. “I believe what followed from there did.”
Ten also said in written submissions that on numerous occasions, Ms Wilkinson and her agent, Nick Fordham, expressed their gratitude for the effort Network Ten and Ms (Marlia) Saunders were putting in, to provide advice and manage the situation.
For example, after the Assurance Letter had been sent to the court, Ms Wilkinson sent an email to Ms Smithies and others, saying: “Thanks so much Tasha, I in turn have to thank all of you for your ongoing and absolutely unwavering support since Sunday.”
Shortly afterwards, Mr Fitzsimons sent an email: “And allow me to say in turn, how much we appreciate YOU, Sarah, and everyone. This was what we call in the trade, a shower of s**t, but we have come a long way forward in 48 hours.”
Mr Fordham then replied: “Thank you team.”
Last year, a board of inquiry into the criminal trial previously heard Wilkinson suffered “utter destruction” by the media for a Logies speech that caused the trial to be delayed.
Mr Lehrmann pleaded not guilty to raping Brittany Higgins and was never convicted. He maintains his innocence.
In a written statement to the inquiry, Wilkinson insisted she had not been warned against the speech by the DPP Shane Drumgold.
“If Mr Drumgold had told me not to give the speech, I would have followed that advice,’’ Wilkinson wrote.
Wilkinson ‘abandoned’ by ‘cruel’ bosses
Earlier, a “distraught” Wilkinson told the Federal Court she felt abandoned by “cruel” Channel Ten bosses over the fallout from her Logies speech and had challenged the CEO to meet her “if she has the courage”.
In a new affidavit, the television host complains she was promised a crisis communications PR team to rebuild her personal reputation following the speech that delayed the criminal trial of Bruce Lehrmann but it never eventuated.
Ms Wilkinson has detailed a tense relationship with her employer and why she wanted her own legal representation in the legal documents.
Network Ten had hired one of the top defamation barristers in the country Matt Collins KC who charges $11,000 a day and solicitors Thomson Geer.
But Wilkinson detailed a raft of reasons she no longer believed she was “front of mind” with the legal team and she doubted them after Channel Ten’s in-house legal team advised her on the Logies speech. Before he was engaged by Ten, Dr Collins KC described the speech as “ill advised”.
After she engaged the top defamation lawyer Sue Chrysanthou, who also charges $8,500 a day and her own solicitors, she was distressed to learn that TV bosses wouldn’t cover any of her personal legal costs.
“I was gutted,” she said. “I felt it unbelievable that Ten could now adopt such a position.
“I thought Ten’s new position was intentionally cruel and wholly disingenuous.”
In her affidavit Wilkinson also reveals she was dumped from The Project and revealed “how devastated I was at being taken off-air for several months and the lack of plans for me to return to air”.
“Ten was content to leave me isolated to take the sole blame for the Logies’ speech,” she said.
“Having regard to all of the circumstances of the last eight months, I had no faith that Ten would give instructions in conducting the proceedings with my separate interests taken into consideration.”
“I told (my agent Nick) Fordham to advise Ten that I had decided to be separately represented in the defamation proceedings.”
She drew up a list of questions on February 8, 2023 for Ten CEO boss Bev McGarvey on a note entitled: ‘Questions for Bev if she has the courage to meet on Friday.’
In her affidavit to court, she said the questions included:
“Why have we never met, been given the details of, or had the opportunity to engage with, Ten’s ‘Crisis Comms team?’
“What evidence do Ten have to show us of their ‘crisis comms’ work,’’ she wrote.
“Why was no effort made to background journalists - in particular repeat offenders - and to balance reporting done by journalists who repeatedly quoted Justice McCallum’s statement about me being warned not to give a Logies speech, but never quoted Bev’s letter to the court saying that we did not believe we were warned by the DPP?”
The contents of the CEO’s letter to the court was never released until months after the criminal trial and was not made public at the time by the ACT Supreme Court.
Wilkinson also revealed she was worried a planned interview series to replace her job on The Project had come to nothing.
“What is Bev’s plan for the ‘interview series’ I am now contracted to do?” she wrote.
“Who will be EPing, what is the time slot, production budget, marketing budget...what calibre of interview subject does she envisage for the three episodes that will have any kind of ratings cut-through that such a short-lived ‘series’ would justify?
“What steps is Ten currently taking to protect my reputation in the press?
“What steps are being taken in regards to combining with News Corp to fight the defamation action against me and Network Ten?
“Will I have a say in Ten’s decision-making process going forward on this defamation action?
“Given the ongoing, serious reputational damage done to me whilst following to the absolute letter all advice given to me up to, including and since the Logies speech - a speech cleared by Ten Legal and Bev herself prior to the speech being given - what does she intend to do to fix it?’
Ms Wilkinson’s affidavit states that the CEO replied that she would go through Wilkinson’s agent - and that any meeting would have to be attended by Ten’s legal team.
“No such meeting took place,” Ms Wilkinson said.
Texts reveal Lisa Wilkinson’s Project bombshell
Previously the court heard Wilkinson reveal she was dumped from The Project following the “brand damage” from her Logies speech — and the bitter fallout was detailed in texts with Network Ten’s CEO.
The explosive revelation is contained in an affidavit that Wilkinson and her lawyers have submitted to the Federal Court in relation to a dispute over who will pay her million-dollar legal fees.
It includes text messages between Wilkinson and the woman she says dumped her from the program, Ten CEO Beverley McGarvey.
In an affidavit to the Federal Court, she revealed she was shocked and distressed by her axing.
“I was shocked, embarrassed and deeply disappointed by Ms McGarvey’s decision to remove me from The Project,” she said.
“At that time, my most recent contract as co-host of The Project had only been signed 11 months before and still had more than two years to run.”
Wilkinson said she found out after her agent Mr Fordham had a meeting with Ms McGarvey.
“He told me that Ms McGarvey had informed him that Ten was doing a ‘rebrand’ of The Project with a number of hosting changes,” she added.
“He told me that she had said that those hosting changes included me.
“He also told me that she had said that, because there had been too much heat on me in the months since the Logies speech – and, as a result, too much ‘brand damage’ – it was best that I be removed from my hosting role on The Project.”
When she said farewell to The Project in 2022, Wilkinson blamed the “targeted toxicity” of sections of the media.
“The last six months have not been easy,” Wilkinson told viewers of the panel show.
“And the relentless, targeted toxicity by some sections of the media has taken a toll not just on me but on people I love.
“I have had a ball,” she said. “But for me right now it’s time for a change. To be clear. I’m not leaving Ten and we’re looking at some very exciting work ideas ahead.”
In the affidavit she says that the CEO, Ms McGarvey, approved Wilkinson’s on-air explanation for her departure and suggested that they “sound very authentic”.
“I said to her that this decision to remove me from The Project would result in yet more negative publicity for me, for The Project, and for Ten, particularly if my sudden departure was without explanation,” Wilkinson said.
Ms McGarvey told Wilkinson in texts “Perfect delivery, you spoke from the heart.”
“It was a beautiful sentiment and you are so generous to your colleagues. Thank you. The media should all be kind, you deserve it.”
In the affidavit, she also took aim at Ten’s refusal to tackle the issue of ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold’s claims he warned her against delivering a speech.
“It signified to me that Ten had no real interest in publicly correcting any of the damage done to me and my reputation, and were now only making it worse,” she said.
“I felt the decision would indicate to the public that I had in fact done something wrong. I knew that the story of me leaving The Project would result in a continuation of significant and humiliating headlines. She said the only direct contact she had with Ten bosses came eight days later when Ms McGarvey called on the eve of her final appearance on the show.”
She revealed that after she was dumped from The Project, she spoke with a solicitor over the changes to her contract.
“I recall describing to him, when I was explaining my situation, how isolated, unprotected and abandoned I felt by the treatment of Ten,” she said.
“Although the variation to my contract envisaged that I participate in an interview series during the years of 2023 and 2024, to this date, so far as I am aware, no steps have been undertaken for this to occur at all, despite Mr Fordham’s repeated requests.”
In the hearing on Tuesday she criticised Ten for not stating clearly her speech was based on legal advice.
“They only ever said to me, ‘we refuse to waive privilege’,” she said.
“And the reason you wanted something more said about those matters was because you were concerned about your reputation, correct?,” barrister Robert Dick asked.
“It was being trashed in the media,” Wilkinson replied.
‘Begged’: Wilkinson’s explosive Logies claim
Also in court today, Wilkinson said she “begged” her employer Channel 10 to make clear that her disastrous Logies speech was approved by company lawyers.
The broadcaster’s tense relationship with her employer over who will pay her million-dollar legal fees has been laid bare in a Federal Court hearing over the dispute.
Her Logies speech is central to the case because Wilkinson argues she felt forced to secure her own legal team due to a lack of faith in Ten’s legal advice.
After she delivered the speech in 2022, the ACT Supreme Court Justice Lucy McCallum delayed the trial and strongly criticised the speech, sparking a media storm.
Wilkinson said today she was being blamed without Ten making clear it had urged her to give the speech and had legalled the contents.
“And I was asking Channel 10 to admit the role that they had played because I was being portrayed in the media as legally irresponsible,” Wilkinson said.
“I had taken significant steps to make sure that that speech was legally responsible. Before I went anywhere near that stage.”
Wilkinson gave evidence on Tuesday in relation to a cross claim that was sparked by a dispute over whether the legal costs are reasonable and whether her employer who is represented by a different legal team should foot the bill.
She said that she had pleaded with Ten amid the fallout from the Logies speech to clear up the circumstances.
“My understanding was that they were putting out something that was very legally considered and missed out on the exact fact that I had been begging them to make clear publicly, and that was they had asked me to give the speech, they had been involved in legalling that speech.”
‘Completely inappropriate’
Justice Lee then asked Ten to explain whether it contended that the legal advice provided to Wilkinson that her Logies speech was acceptable was anything other than “completely inappropriate.”
The judge said he wanted to “cut to the chase”.
“Does Channel Ten say...the advice that was given was anything other than completely inappropriate?,” Justice Lee asked.
In response, Mr Dick SC said: “No we don’t accept that it was completely inappropriate.
“We accept that it ultimately, in the events that happened, gave rise to a real risk of contempt and it was unfortunate.”
Wilkinson also detailed her displeasure at Ten’s decision to hire Dr Collins KC, on the grounds that he had criticised her over the Logies speech and the potential contempt risk.
“And you raised a concern with Ms Smithies. about Dr. Collins being briefed?” Mr Dick asked.
“Correct,” Wilkinson replied. “Yes, this was directly after he criticised me on three national television programs.
“They said that if they took on Dr. Collins, he would no longer be able to make critical comments of that kind about me.”
She was also critical of Ten for not making a submission to the board of inquiry into the trial, where Wilkinson’s own barrister appeared and cross examined the Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold over his purported warning – or lack thereof – regarding her Logies speech.
“The board of inquiry, that they refuse to put a submission to clear my name, and to cross examine Mr Drumgold,” Wilkinson said.
Wilkinson’s emails to agent amid Logies fallout
The Federal Court also heard evidence about emails between her agent Nick Fordham over the fallout from her Logies speech.
Wilkinson was cross examined by Mr Dick SC. She is represented by Michael Elliott SC and Sue Chrysanthou SC.
Mr Dick pointed out public statements of support for Wilkinson.
“It’s consistent with your employer, Network 10, wanting to make a public show of support for you at what was looking like a difficult time for both yourself and 10,’’ Mr Dick said.
“Yes,’’ Wilkinson replied.
“And you understood even though it’s not explicit in Ms (Tasha) Smithies email, that there was a concern that Network 10 yourself, possibly others might be exposed to the risk of some contempt charge or contempt proceeding?,’’ Mr Dick said.
“Yes,’’ Wilkinson replied.
“In a nutshell, it was a very serious matter. Yes. And you were taking it very seriously?”
“Yes,’’ Wilkinson replied.
Earlier, Justice Michael Lee indicated he may deliver his judgement on Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation action against Ten in March.
“Apart from Christmas Day, I have been working steadily in relation to this matter and another matter,’ he said.
“I anticipate the process of proofing that I would be in a position to deliver judgement in March.”
YouTuber to face contempt charge
Earlier on Tuesday, a YouTuber called Glenn Logan waived his right to silence and confirmed he had posted video clips from the defamation trial involving Mr Lehrmann.
His lawyer submitted medical evidence that while Logan, who is “not intellectually disabled but of low intelligence”, was prepared to apologise to the court for his error.
“Mr Logan admits the contempt,” he said.
“It occurred through a lack of attention, little knowledge of the consequences and borne out of new technology and Mr Logan’s mental history has clearly contributed to the offence and lack of understanding.”
The YouTube channel, which attacks “extreme feminism” and has more than 3500 subscribers, included hundreds of videos attacking women including former Australian of the year Grace Tame.
Other videos posted by the man attacked Brittany Higgins, who he described as a liar.
After Mr Logan’s lawyer detailed his client’s remorse for the alleged contempt, Justice Lee then played another video, where Mr Logan urged viewers to watch his videos on other servers.
“They have removed all but one of my videos from the Lisa Wilkinson defamation trial. That’s the bad news,” the video states.
“The good news is they can still be seen in full on Rumble.”
Justice Lee then indicated he intended to refer the matter for contempt proceedings. His lawyer was then excused before Mr Logan arrived.
Last year, Justice Lee ordered Mr Logan face the Federal Court for allegedly posting images and clips from the defamation trial involving Lehrmann.
In December, Justice Lee instructed YouTube’s owner, Google, to reveal the identity of the account’s owner.
More Coverage
He then ordered Mr Logan to appear in court in Sydney on February 13 “to show cause as to why proceedings for contempt should not be instituted against him”.
On Tuesday, Mr Logan failed to appear as instructed at 9.30am but his lawyer indicated he was on the way and had caught the first plane that day from Melbourne.
The Federal Court hearings have been broadcast on an official YouTube livestream that, at times, has been watched by more than 20,000 people.
‘New intel’ blows Shire cold case wide open
A new witness has come forward over the disappearance of two teenage girls in Sydney’s south, breaking the case open again after more than four decades.
Billionaire charged over asbestos crisis
A billionaire developer and owner of a popular chocolate chain has been charged over the asbestos-in-mulch crisis that saw Sydney parks, schools, and hospitals closed.
Bucks party rapist ‘bashed’ in jail
A man convicted of a series of rapes alongside his groom-to-be brother was assaulted while waiting to learn his fate.