If Lisa Wilkinson is hoping for redemption, she faces an uphill battle.
The TV presenter will step into the witness box on Thursday to testify in the defamation case Bruce Lehrmann has brought against her and Network 10.
After the disaster of her Logies speech, which humiliated her and delayed Lehrmann’s criminal trial for three months, this is Wilkinson’s moment.
It is also a pivotal moment in the defamation trial.
Wilkinson will not be trying to prove Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins. That part of the trial – the truth defence – is over. And while each side has scored blows against the other, it’s fair to say there has been no knock-out punch.
If Justice Michael Lee, presiding over the trial, is unable to come to a firm conclusion over the truth of the claims, Wilkinson and her former colleagues at the network will have to rely on the defence of qualified privilege – that is, that they did everything in their power to act reasonably and fairly in preparing the program.
That defence has faced a strong challenge over the last two days as Lehrmann’s counsel, Matthew Richardson SC, has probed the conduct of Wilkinson’s producer, Angus Llewellyn.
On Tuesday, Llewellyn had trouble explaining why The Project team so readily accepted Higgins’ claims that photo of a bruise on her leg was evidence of the alleged rape.
On Wednesday the producer was under fire over the program’s dramatic opening statement that it was the story of a rape and “a young woman forced to choose between her career and the pursuit of justice”.
In an early part of Wilkinson’s interview, Higgins says Linda Reynolds and her chief of staff, Fiona Brown, had been supportive of her going to the police, but later in the interview claims she was told “we’re not going to stop you, but you just don’t have a job.”
Llewellyn denied Higgins’ account was “riddled with inconsistencies”.
But the most dangerous moments for Llewellyn came at the hands of Justice Lee himself.
When Richardson suggested there was no proof Higgins had been told she would lose her job, Llewellyn responded that “it’s murky, opaque territory”.
Justice Michael Lee interjected: “Are you saying that at the time the program was broadcast you had – to use your words – no proof of that allegation that she was being told that if she proceeded with police charges that she’d lose her job?
After several requests from the judge to answer the question, Llewellyn agreed he didn’t have proof.
Later the judge again interjected, over Llewellyn’s denial that Higgins’ fiance, David Sharaz, had a political agenda, despite saying the pair wanted to break the story in time for parliamentary sitting week and that his friend, Labor’s Katy Gallagher, would “probe” the issue in Question Time.
Richardson had asked Llewellyn: “You knew that Mr Sharaz intended to assist the then opposition in pursuing this story in parliament, correct?”
“Maybe,” Mr Llewellyn responded.
Justice Michael Lee interjected: “Is that a serious answer?” and went on to remind the witness he was giving sworn testimony.
Wilkinson will come under equally sharp scrutiny on Thursday over the session, in which she and Higgins war-gamed how to recruit prominent politicians and media figures who could help give momentum to their upcoming interview.
Wilkinson will certainly be asked about her comment: “I’ve so got Linda Reynolds in my sights now.”
She may also be asked about the tantalisingly headlined, but as yet unexplored, series of emails she exchanged with Sharaz headed “# MeToo Liberal Party Project Pitch”.
Llewellyn was asked several times whether he had told Wilkinson about developments in the lead-up to broadcast, including whether he had passed on information that contradicted Higgins’ claims that she had been unsupported by Reynolds’ chief of staff, Fiona Brown.
Lehrmann’s lawyers will seek to probe any discrepancies between the accounts of Wilkinson and her Channel 10 colleagues.
Wilkinson has hired her own legal team, headed by top defamation silk Sue Chrysanthou, to represent her in the proceedings, after dumping Ten’s lawyers in the apparent belief they would not adequately protect her interests.
On Thursday, Chrysanthou – after taking a back seat for much of the proceedings – will finally get to earn her fee.
Pesutto lawyers grill Deeming’s social media expert witness
Lawyers for John Pesutto have questioned Moira Deeming’s expert witness over accuracy in his data on day five of the high-profile defamation trial.
Read more
‘I’ve failed students’: Sydney Uni VC sorry over anti-Semitism
Mark Scott apologises over anti-Semitism at the university after Jewish students and staff told a Senate inquiry the campus was ‘probably one of the worst places to be a Jewish student’.
Read more