Leave Lisa Wilkinson alone: Ten warns of defamation suit over Brittany Higgins row

Network flags action against media outlets as Lisa Wilkinson was forced to give court undertakings not to engage in commentary on the Higgins case.

Lisa Wilkinson has cancelled her Project appearances for the week. Picture: Channel 9

The Ten Network flagged potential defamation action against other media outlets on Thursday as star presenter Lisa Wilkinson was forced to give undertakings to an ACT court not to engage in further commentary about the Brittany Higgins case or the man accused of raping her.

As pressure grew on The Project co-host over her speech praising Ms Higgins just days before the trial of her allegations was due to start, Ten lashed the media’s treatment of its star.

Wilkinson has cancelled her Project appearances for the week. She was scheduled to front Thursday night’s program but Ten revealed just hours before it was to air that she would not be appearing.

She was to co-host on Friday and Sunday nights but those appearances have also been cancelled.

Bruce Lehrmann.

“Recent reporting on Lisa Wilkinson by some media organisations has been inaccurate and unfair,” the Ten statement read.

“There are significant facts that cannot be disclosed until after the trial has concluded.

“This reporting is now causing significant harm and we ask these organisations to cease this harassment to allow Lisa the best opportunity to give her evidence in court and to enable the trial to go ahead in a fair and timely manner.

“We are closely monitoring all coverage of this issue and Lisa and Network 10 reserve their rights in respect of any future defamation claims.

“Network 10 continues to fully support Lisa in her ongoing and full commitment to doing the right thing as a witness in the trial.”

The ACT Supreme Court on Thursday heard Wilkinson and her employer had narrowly escaped injunction after writing to ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum and Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold following the temporary stay of proceedings on Tuesday.

The letter, mentioned during Thursday’s court hearing but not read out, is understood to have been an offer to not engage in any further commentary on the case.

Bruce Lehrmann was charged last year with sexual intercourse without consent and has pleaded not guilty.

Brittany Higgins. Picture: Damian Shaw

On Tuesday, Chief Justice McCallum stayed Mr Lehrmann’s trial after Wilkinson’s acceptance speech at the Logie Awards sparked publicity that the court found temporarily prejudiced his right to a fair hearing.

Mr Lehrmann’s legal team said last year the former Liberal staffer “absolutely and unequivocally denies any form of sexual activity took place”.

Mr Drumgold on Thursday said he had also sought “very specific” written undertakings from Wilkinson and Ten that they would refrain from any further commentary around the case ahead of the trial.

“They make reference to commentary surrounding the allegation including commentary on the complainant and accused,” he said. “They involve acknowledgment of the issues of the trial sub judice and they involve acknowledgment that interfering with the due administration of law or breach of the sub judice could amount to contempt proceedings.

“If, as I expect, those undertakings are given, there is no ground for me to seek an injunction.”

He also contacted lawyers for the Australian Radio Network, owner of WSFM, which, the court has heard, featured comments about the rape allegation on the Jonesy and Amanda show.

However, on Thursday night the office of the DPP declined to comment on whether any written undertakings had been received. The new trial date has been set for October 4. The matter is listed for four weeks.

Mr Lehrmann’s barrister, Steve Whybrow, applied for the trial to start early next year because “the bushfires are still burning” in regards to ongoing publicity resulting from Wilkinson’s Logies speech.

Chief Justice McCallum said a delay of more than three months would allow prejudicial publicity to be “ameliorated”.

“A period of three months is a significant period during which attention to prejudicial issues fades in the mind of potential jurors,” she said.

“The concern on Tuesday was the immediacy of empanelling a jury with a list of witnesses that included Ms Wilkinson in a week where … few people could fail to have connected her name with success in publishing a true story.

“And my assessment is that three months, coupled with what I anticipate will be a dampening of the debate as a result of the judgment and a communication I have received since … will permit the trial to be conducted fairly.”

Chief Justice McCallum said she had been forced to “rob Peter to pay Paul” in order to accommodate a new trial listing this year by sacrificing planned time out of court and her own leave.