What just happened? Taylor Auerbach’s intervention explained

He might be telling the truth, but it looks like the motive is vengeance: Justice Michael Lee’s savage take on Lehrmann case star witness Taylor Auerbach. An explainer from The Front podcast.

Former Seven producer Taylor Auerbach: the witness Justice MIchael Lee has some strong opinions on. Picture: Jeremy Piper

$750 in pre-production expenses.

That line on an invoice – allegedly sent by Bruce Lehrmann to Network Seven in January 2023 – was a secret code for cocaine and sex.

That’s a claim contained in the evidence of a former Network Seven producer named Taylor Auerbach, who’s turned on his former employers and is now the star witness for their rivals, Network Ten.

What did Taylor Auerbach say in court?

Auerbach has suddenly popped into this defamation trial, offering to provide evidence for Ten about what he claims went on behind the scenes when Seven was preparing an exclusive interview with Lehrmann, aired in June 2023.

Auerbach has talked about his own involvement in long boozy lunches; nights with sex workers; the procurement of Class A Drugs. He’s said Bruce Lehrmann was involved in some of that, too. He’s also suggested his bosses at Seven knew what was going on, although he hasn’t alleged they participated in any wrongdoing.

Seven has denied ever approving that kind of behaviour and said this is not the culture of its network.

Auerbach says he is angry at his former colleagues at Seven, which sacked him. Auerbach says he lost his job after years of bullying.

Ten’s defending Bruce Lehrmann’s claim for defamation, over its story which Lehrmann says destroyed his life – where Brittany Higgins accused him of rape.

Why has Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation trial been re-opened?

That case was over – and we were just awaiting Justice Michael Lee’s decision – until Auerbach entered the case and Ten asked the judge if they could make some urgent submissions.

What’s the point? Ten says it’s that Auerbach’s wild stories all show that Bruce Lehrmann can’t be believed, and so the judge shouldn’t believe him when he says, “I didn’t rape Brittany Higgins”.

What was on the invoice Bruce Lehrmann is alleged to have sent to Channel Seven?

First, the invoice, which Auerbach says came after a December 2022 evening when, according to him, Lehrmann bought a bag of cocaine and booked sex workers to come to the hotel where he and Auerbach were partying.

Auerbach said on Thursday Lehrmann spent thousands of dollars but then told Auerbach he was out of money and asked if Seven could reimburse him for the expense.

Auerbach said he suggested trying to put it through as what he called “per diems” or daily expenses. But he said he realised that wouldn’t fly with Seven’s finance system, and had to come up with another system.

Here’s what Auerbach said during questioning by counsel for Ten, Matthew Collins KC.

Collins: “Can I just ask you, what’s your understanding of the matter to which the $750 charge for pre-production expenses relates?”

Auerbach: “Mr. Lehrmann’s expenditure on cocaine and prostitutes.”

Collins: “And what’s the basis for that understanding?”

Auerbach: “That he indicated to me he needed to replenish his bank account after the bender.”

Matthew Collins wanted to know how it ended up being put into the system as pre-production expenses, not per diems as Auerbach had originally suggested.

Auerbach: “That was the vaguest of the categories that we could choose without being deceptive or misleading, I suppose. And that’s – it was put through the expense system as pre-production.”

Collins: “To your knowledge, was this invoice paid by Seven?”

Auerbach: “Yes, I believe it was.”

Collins: “What’s the basis for that belief?”

Auerbach: “Mr. Llewellyn told me it was approved. Ms. Aquilina told me it was getting paid. And Mr. Lehrmann told me he received the funds.”

Justice Lee: “No further questions? Well, I’ll ask one. Is that the only invoice you’re aware of?”

Auerbach: “Of this type, yes.”

Seven’s previously denied ever paying any invoice like this. Auerbach said he believed the invoice had been paid, saying Lehrmann told him the funds had appeared in his bank account and that the unit manager on the show, Spotlight, told him it had been processed.

Taylor Auerbach’s corporate credit card expenses

Auerbach had described another boozy lunch that wound up with sex workers being called – this one in November 2022.

Auerbach has detailed ‘the worst day of his life’, when he had to confess to his bosses that he’d rung up more than $10,000 on a corporate credit card in charges to a Thai massage parlour. He offered to resign and his bosses gave him another chance, telling him to pay the sex worker in cash and ask her to reverse the card transaction.

But in the witness box this week, Auerbach has claimed his then boss, Mark Llewellyn, who was Spotlight’s executive producer, actually offered him a promotion and a pay rise after that event.

Auerbach’s conceded he has no documentary evidence of this alleged offer.

In re-examination, Network Ten’s barrister, Matthew Collins KC, picked up the thread.

Collins: “What were you told in relation to, your superiors; state of satisfaction with your conduct?”

Auerbach: I was told that it would be a bad look, and I needed to keep it quiet. And that was in the meeting with Mr. Llewellyn when I was offered the promotion and pay rise.

Taylor Auerbach’s interactions with Bruce Lehrmann

Taylor Auerbach detailed the conversations he had over several months with Lehrmann, long before Lehrmann signed a contract to give his exclusive to Seven.

He’s described this as rapport-building; winning Lehrmann’s trust. That included spending time in Canberra, where Lehrmann was going through a criminal trial. He pleaded not guilty to sexually assaulting Higgins, but the trial was aborted before the jury could return a verdict thanks to juror misconduct.

The ACT’s Director of Public Prosecutions then dropped the charges against Lehrmann, saying he believed Higgins was not capable of going through another trial.

On 23 October 2022, Auerbach texted Steve Jackson: “I’ve got the yarn. I’ve just been on the piss with Bruce Lehrmann.”

Matt Collins asked what Bruce Lehrmann had said to prompt him to send that message.

“He said that he appreciated the fact that I wasn’t sitting with the rest of the feminazis in the press pack,” Auerbach said.

Lehrmann’s lawyer leapt up to object and the judge agreed. He sent Auerbach out of the courtroom and then let rip at Matt Collins.

Justice Lee lets rip

“I’m just concerned how far we’re going down into what is increasingly looking like a rabbit hole,” Justice Lee said. “I just don’t see how a throwaway remark about an alleged characterisation of Mr. Lehrmann of some journalists is going to assist me to the fair determination of these proceedings.”

The judge said it started from the moment Auerbach’s solicitor, Rebekah Giles, stood up on Thursday and said Auerbach had left Seven because of what she called anti-Semitism and sustained bullying.

“This is starting to stray in a series of allegations made against people who are not parties to these proceedings, who I have some concerns about, them being afforded adequate procedural fairness,” he said.

Justice Lee indicated later in the hearing he’d be open to hearing from any Seven employees who wished to defend themselves against Auerbach’s criticism, if they wished to be represented in court.

Why did Taylor Auerbach leave Channel Seven?

The reason we don’t know more about the circumstances of Auerbach’s departure from Seven is that he signed a confidential deed with the network. That’s been placed before the judge but it’s not going to be released publicly.

The judge also disallowed questions Matthew Collins tried to ask Auerbach, to give more detail about the alleged bullying.

But Justice Lee really got on a roll when he came to Auerbach’s claim on Thursday that a lawyer, Richard Keegan, had rung him at Seven after the Spotlight episode went to air and told him Network Ten was upset about the broadcast.

This was part of Auerbach’s explanation for why he didn’t have any documents proving that Seven approved the expensing of drugs and sex.

Auerbach told the court Keegan told him to “have a look at the camera tapes” – which Auerbach said he interpreted as an instruction, backed up by Mark Llewellyn, to destroy evidence of his communications with Lehrmann.

On Sky News on Thursday night, presenter Andrew Bolt swept to Richard Keegan’s defence.

“[Auerbach says] Channel Seven’s lawyer, Richard Keegan – who works for us here at Sky, too – told [Auerbach] to destroy any incriminating documents,” Bolt said. ‘Not quite in, you know, quite so many words. But Auerbach said he got the message and did just that.

“Now. Richard Keegan actually legals my stuff quite often. For all I know, he’s legalled what I’m telling you now, I don’t know. I’ve heard huge trouble, to be honest, believing that Richard would do what Auerbach claims. But listen, this is for the judge to decide, okay?”

In court, the judge said this:

“Now, it’s all well and good for this witness to come along and say a solicitor of the Supreme Court of New South Wales made an allegation – which would be tantamount to professional misconduct,” Justice Lee said.

Collins moved to pacify the judge, saying he wouldn’t be making any submissions that Keegan had done anything wrong – that is, he wouldn’t back up Auerbach’s assertion.

“This poor gentleman, because of what is said, has probably had a very uncomfortable night when he has heard allegations being made against him that he behaved in conduct which would be gross professional misconduct,” Justice Lee said.

“And I’m very concerned that allegations have been thrown around like a Gatling gun without any fair opportunity of them being met. And so I’m not going to give you leave to adduce further evidence in chief from this witness to make yet further allegations, except to the extent that they bear upon what Mr. Lehrmann has said under oath, or when he’s been under obligation to tell the truth.

“I’m afraid I think we’re straying beyond that territory and I want to put this back in a box.”

What Lisa Wilkinson’s lawyer says about Taylor Auerbach

In this trial, there’s no jury. And that means Justice Michael Lee is free to let his personality fly free – grilling the lawyers and expressing his opinions in a way judges don’t do when juries are present.

Counsel for Lisa Wilkinson, Barry Dean, told the judge Taylor Auerbach should be believed. After all, he’d admitted witnessing drug-taking, procuring sex workers and destroying the golf clubs of his former friend and ex-boss, Steve Jackson.

Here’s the exchange between Dean and Justice Lee in court:

Dean: “In our submission, Mr. Auerbach was a very impressive witness in his presentation and demeanour in the witness box. And there are some further aspects of his evidence that, in our submission, weigh on his credit. The first is that he came to this court and freely made admissions against his own interest, both reputationally and when he was challenged on certain matters in cross-examination.”

Justice Lee: “But there’s a question why he did that. Yes, generally someone who’s making admissions against interest, you view their evidence through that and might think that they’re more cogent witnesses because of that.

“But it’s very unusual to see a witness in the witness box saying they hate people. It’s very unusual, that degree of animus that one sees from the golf club video. And one could rationally form the view that this is a man who desperately wanted to do as much damage to his previous employer as he could conceivably do.

“That doesn’t mean he’s not a truth-teller, but don’t put him up as some sort of valuable, public-interested person who was coming along to get something off his chest because he thought he’d assist His Majesty’s justices. He’s a man who wanted to make a range of allegations against people under absolute privilege.”

What Bruce Lehrmann’s lawyer says about Taylor Auerbach

At the beginning of these dramatic hearings, Matthew Richardson SC, counsel for Bruce Lehrmann, described Taylor Auerbach as “dancing in the sunshine”, vomiting up recollections about his time working with Seven.

In his closing submissions on Friday, Richardson said he was reminded of a Joe Biden press conference where the US president said, “Look, I didn’t over promise, but I have probably outperformed what anybody thought would happen.”

“Your Honour, the application has not moved the dial,” Richardson said, referring to Ten’s application to re-open the proceedings.

Richardson said Seven did not publish any of the messages Lehrmann allegedly passed to Auerbach – that’s the 2300-plus pages of texts between Brittany Higgins and Ben Dillaway.

He said Mark Llewellyn, the executive producer, had himself obtained the messages between Higgins and Peter FitzSimons, and Auerbach admitted he had no idea where they came from.

And Richardson said, anyway, Lehrmann had not lied in court – simply that, when asked if Seven had paid his accommodation for 12 months, he said: “Yes, that’s what I get.”

“In one sense, the whole point of this was supposed to be, ‘Oh, gosh, I found this incredibly important material,” Richardson said. “‘I must hurry off to the federal court and reveal all’.

“But when he was actually asked about when he found the material and when he knew about it, he was very evasive. And equally he was evasive about the deletion of documents and the reasons for that,” Richardson continued.

“Your Honour also heard his motive. He is full of loathing for his former colleagues and employer.

“And the last thing is this: I just wanted to note that, at paragraph five of affidavit three, Mr. Auerbach – who I understand is about 32 years old – said he rarely looks at his Hotmail account,” Richardson said, concluding: “Those are my submissions, Your Honour.”

What Network Ten’s lawyer says about Taylor Auerbach

So, what’s this all about again?

It’s about Ten’s claim that Bruce Lehrmann can’t be trusted.

Ten says the Auerbach evidence shows Lehrmann handed over confidential documents from his criminal trial to Network Seven. In particular, it’s about something called an e-brief prepared by the Australian Federal Police of all their evidence in the case.

Ten says if Lehrmann handed that e-brief – or parts of it – to Seven, it would have been a breach of the Harman Undertaking, which is a court rule that you can’t use material obtained in a court case for any other purpose. Ten says that’s a serious abuse of process – so serious it warrants the whole defamation case being thrown out of court.

“This is not a trifling or excusable matter,” Matthew Collins KC said. “It warranted the reopening of the case because it goes squarely to Mr Lerhmann’s attitude towards the administration of justice.”

OK so what about the sex workers and drugs? Sure, it’s juicy, but is it important to this trial?

Well, Network Ten says Seven showered Lehrmann in largesse, including fancy lunches, golf trips, flights, accommodation – and that’s all contrary to evidence given by Lehrmann earlier in the defamation trial.

In court, under cross examination, Lehrmann said the only thing Seven had given him was payment for his accommodation.

Ten says that demonstrates – again – Lehrmann just can’t be believed.

As for the night when Auerbach rang up charges on the corporate card, Collins said this:

“The essential facts are not really much in dispute. Mr Auerbach did spend in excess of $10,000 on Mr Llewellyn’s corporate credit card to pay for prostitutes and drugs and Mr Lehrmann benefited from those purchases.

“Somehow, in the perverse universe in which this program was apparently operating, Mr. Auerbach was not terminated for spending more than $10,000 on the company credit card on illicit activities in connection with getting the story of the year. It’s staggering.”

Justice Lee noted Auerbach’s boss, Steve Jackson, ordered him to repay the money, told him to negotiate with the sex worker about reversing the transaction, and told him by text in a tone Justice Lee described “as a mate”: “I reckon you might survive.”

Here’s the exchange between Justice Lee and Collins about that:

Justice Lee: “Isn’t that showing a degree of concern, and disapproval of the actions, which may well be able to be reversed if everything is sort of fixed up?”

Collins: “I know what I’d do if it was my employee. I wouldn’t be saying, go and get the credit card reversed and pay cash and you can keep your job. It’s an extraordinary state of affairs.”

Lee didn’t seem convinced of the point of all this and said there were only two possible explanations for how the documents came to be on Auerbach’s phone – either Lehrman gave them to him, or someone unknown gave them to another employee of Seven.

Lawyers for Ten and Lisa Wilkinson, the other defendant in this matter, say the only plausible source is Lehrmann.

---

This is an edited transcript of The Australian’s daily news podcast The Front. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or The Australian’s app.