One witness who won big in Bruce Lehrmann verdict (2024)

Bruce Lehrmann has lost his defamation case against Network10 and Lisa Wilkinson,and Brittany Higgins' allegations have been vindicated by a civil court.

But they weren't the only ones to win and lose from the case Justice Michael Lee described on Thursday as an 'omnishambles' - and one that has left a trail of destruction through the worlds of Australian media and politics.

In a landmark judgment on Monday, Justice Lee was scathing of almost all the main players in the case.

Mr Lehrmann copped the most of his ire, described as someone who deliberately lied to the court and a rapist who had overplayed his hand - memorably finding he made a mistake after his criminal trial ended without a verdict.

'After escaping the lion’s den, Bruce Lehrmann made the mistake to come back for his hat,' Justice Lee quipped.

But Ms Higgins was criticised as an unreliable and 'unsatisfactory' witness whose version of events had shifted as time passed.

Now that a judgement has been handed down, Daily Mail Australia examines the winners and losers of the case which gripped the nation - and what comes next for the main players.

WINNERS

Fiona Brown

Fiona Brown, Linda Reynolds' former chief of staff, was one of the only witnesses in the case to receive a large amount of praise from Justice Lee during his judgement on Monday.

Ms Brown, who had been Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins' boss, had shown 'integrity' in her handling of Ms Higgins' case, Justice Lee found.

The staffer had resisted political pressure to report Ms Higgins' incident to the Federal Police, the judge said.

'Despite Ms Brown facing sustainedpressure from her Minister and one of the Minister’s colleagues to report the incident to the AFP – even though she was unsure an allegation was then being made of rape and irrespective of the wishes of Ms Higgins – she pushed back.'

The judge said Ms Brown may have adopted the cautious view that sex or something untoward may have happened between Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann in March 2019.

'She showed integrity in resisting pressure she subjectively considered inappropriate and evinced a concern for the autonomy and welfare of Ms Higgins,' he said.

'In these circ*mstances, to be later vilified as an unfeeling apparatchik willing to throw up roadblocks in covering up criminal conduct at the behest of one’s political overlords must be worse than galling.'

The judge said he 'unhesitatingly' preferred Ms Brown's evidence over Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann's.

But he noted she did make one mistake in the early days of the allegations - her 'failure torecognise the inappropriateness of holding the initial meeting with Senator Reynolds in the Minister’s office was maladroit,' Justice Lee said.

Maladroit means clumsy, or inept.

'But whatever shortcomings can be identified (including with the benefit of hindsight), she ensured she took considered advice from those in whom she reposed confidence, recorded, and acted upon that advice and, subject to the above, showed commonsense and compassion by her own lights,' he added.

BRITTANY HIGGINS

For the first time since going public with her allegations in 2021, Ms Higgins has been vindicated, with the Federal Court finding that her evidence had the 'ring of truth.'

Justice Lee was unwavering in his findings that, on the basis of probabilities and to a civil standard of proof, Mr Lehrmann did rape Ms Higgins when they returned to Parliament House after a night of drinking in March 2019.

Mr Lehrmann has not been convicted of any crime - the criminal standard of proof is higher, beyond all reasonable doubt - following the inconclusive result of the criminal trial.

In spite of the clear win for Ms Higgins, she didn't walk away entirely unscathed.

Justice Lee was critical of some of her decisions throughout the ordeal, describing her as an 'unsatisfactory' witness who wasn't always truthful.

However while Mr Lehrmann's untruths were described as deliberate in many aspects, Justice Lee was considerate of a sexual assault survivor's trauma responses.

He said: 'Taking all my reservations as to the credibility and reliability of Ms Higgins into account, her evidence that she was not fully aware of her surroundings but then suddenly became aware of Mr Lehrmann on top of her, at which time he was performing the sexual act, when given orally before me, struck me forcefully as being credible and as having the ring of truth.'

LISA WILKINSON

Lisa Wilkinson celebrated the ruling but her knowledge and experience as a journalist were called into question during Justice Lee's ruling - despite him ultimately finding in her favour.

The judge described Wilkinson as a 'polished and articulate witness' but added 'regrettably, these not inconsiderable skills were often deployed by her in the witness box to advocate for her views'.

The judge took aim at her speech at the Logie awards, which ultimately delayed Bruce Lehrmann's rape trial.

'Her refusal to make the obvious concession about the speech at the Logies ... conveyed the message that Ms Higgins was credible and to be believed and her rape allegations were correct,' he said.

The judge pointed out that she made the speech eight days before the criminal trial was due to begin and, given her experience as a journalist, she should have known better.

He accepted that Ms Wilkinson was 'sincere and genuine' in accepting the underlying truth of Ms Higgins' allegations, noting she described the story as 'the most important work I have ever done' in the offending speech.

The judge said Wilkinson was linked to Ms Higgins and delivered the speech because she felt the need to stand up for her, rather than because she was under pressure to do so from her employer as she had indicated.

Outside court, a vindicated Ms Wilkinson said: 'Today the Federal court has found that I published a true story about a rape at a federal politician's office in March 2019.

'I sincerely hope the judgment gives strength to women around the country.'

NETWORK TEN

While Network Ten won the case on the basis of a truth defence, Justice Lee was scathing of the network's journalistic conduct.

Justice Lee says there was 'no proper investigation' into Brittany Higgins' rape allegations by the network.

He said The Project producer Angus Llewellyn and Lisa Wilkinson were 'willing to assist Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz as intended', and slammed the network's attempt to contact Mr Lehrmann prior to broadcast.

'If Ten wanted to get in touch with Mr Lehrmann, that would have been achieved,' he said.

Ten mounted two defences to the defamation proceedings: qualified privilege and truth.

The qualified privilege defence 'fell short of the standard', with Justice Lee notingMr Lehrmann was not 'living as a hermit', but was working in public relations, and would have been easy to contact.

His contact details had been provided to Ten by David Sharaz, but Justice Lee said that was 'obviously inadequate'.

In spite of Justice Lee's takedown, Ten are clearly happy with the outcome.

Justin Quill from media lawyers Thomson Geer, which acted for Network Ten - said: 'This is a resounding win for Channel Ten

'It is a dismal failure by Bruce Lehrmann. He brought this claim to court for two reasons - one to make money, and two to reinvent history.

'He wanted people to believe his version of events and he's failed in both endeavours.'

LOSERS

BRUCE LEHRMANN

There is no doubt that Bruce Lehrmann walks away the biggest loser from the defamation proceedings he launched.

He set out to clear his name of the allegation that he was a rapist- and now Justice Lee has told the world that, to a civil standard of proof, he did rape Ms Higgins.

Justice Lee was also scathing in his assessment of Mr Lehrmann's personality.

He described him aslike Walter Mitty, adding that he had 'no compunction about departing from the truth if he felt it was expedient'.

'To remark that Mr Lehrmann is a poor witness is an exercise in understatement,' Justice Lee said.

'His attachment to the truth was a tenuous one, by fashioning his responses in what he perceived to be his forensic interests.'

The judge pointed to how Mr Lehrmann claimed in court that he was no more attracted to Ms Higgins than to anyone in the courtroom.

Justice Lee said Mr Lehrmann's denial of how attractive he found Ms Higgins was contradicted by what he said in his exclusive interview with Seven's Spotlight program.

'He is not a compulsive liar,' the judge said.

'I would not accept anything he said except where it amounted to an admission, or was corroborated elsewhere.'

Justice Lee argued that Mr Lehrmann has been attracted to Ms Higgins for a significant length of time, and that on the night the rape occurred, 'for the first time he had been able to kiss the object of his attraction quite passionately'.

'He was a man who had already acted unfaithfully to his girlfriend and had no scruples about doing it again. He was a 23-year-old male cheating on his girlfriend.

'Human experience suggests what he then wanted to happen is not shrouded in mystery.

'Common sense suggests there is one dominant thought running through the mind of Mr Lehrmann as he returned to Parliament House, and it had nothing to do with the French submarine contract.'

Justice Lee said Mr Lehrmann had likely told Ms Higgins that he wanted to show her some whisky at Parliament House, which could have been why she went back with him.

SEVEN NETWORK

The Seven Network is another clear loser in the case with its most senior member of staff who presided over its interviews with Mr Lehrmann exiting the TV station.

The network announced prior to the judgement that Spotlight executive producer Mark Llewellyn, had left the network.

'Mark Llewellyn no longer works for the Seven Network,' a spokesperson said.

Mr Llewellyn was in charge of the program when it produced its TV interviews with Mr Lehrmann.

The under-siege network is facing internal rancour amid Mr Auerbach's allegations Spotlight paid for Mr Lehrmann's 'drugs and sex workers' while trying to secure the interview.

Those allegations - made earlier this month - did not impact Justice Lee's findings, and Seven denies the claim.

It was also revealed during the proceedings that Seven paid for Mr Lehrmann's accommodation in Sydney for a whole year.

NEITHER WINNER OR LOSER

TAYLOR AUERBACH

Taylor Auerbach's decision to wade into the messy defamation proceedings had a relatively small impact on Monday's ruling.

Mr Auerbach's evidence led Justice Lee to accept Mr Lehrmann had been 'less than candid' in his recollection about how the Seven Network interview came about, what documents he did or did not provide, and the total compensation he received from the TV station.

His evidence about how Seven obtained some documents from Mr Lehrmann's criminal trial also 'fortified' Justice Lee's negative assessment of the former political staffer's credit.

However, Justice Lee noted that Mr Auerbach was motivated by 'rancour' - as evidenced in his 'wanton and vaguely disturbing destruction of what appeared to be a perfectly serviceable set of golf clubs'.

'Mr Auerbach accepted in cross-examination that he “hated” his former colleague and friend, Spotlight producer Mr Steve Jackson.

'His resentment was palpable.... It is unnecessary to make factual findings in relation to many aspects of his evidence, but one would generally be cautious in making findings based upon incomplete evidence and resting solely up on the word of a man motivated by such rancour.'

About an hour after the findings were handed down, Mr Auerbach wrote a pointed post on X.

He wrote: 'On this day, exactly 112 years ago to the hour, RMS Titanic sunk, felled by an iceberg on her maiden journey in the dark of night.'

The RMS Titanic was thought to be unsinkable, until she hit an iceberg on her maiden voyage and plunged to the depths of the North Atlantic Ocean on April 15, 1912. More than 1500 people died in the tragedy.

Mr Auerbach didn't directly mention Mr Lehrmann in his post - but the implication was clear.