“Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins” Someone finally said it.

This morning I sat in the local doctor's surgery waiting room, my eyes focused on my phone. The older people also sitting in the waiting room were probably judging me for barely looking up from my phone once, but I didn’t care. I was more than tuned into the video (playing with subtitles), Judge Michael Lee was handing down his verdict. The day had finally come. 

It turns out that I was one of 45,000 people who tuned into the livestream of the final judgement, curious to know the outcome of the five-week defamation trial that ended three months ago. 

To jog your memory Bruce Lehrmann, an alleged rapist, was suing Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson for defamation after it aired an interview on The Project with Brittany Higgins. In this interview, she accused an unnamed former colleague of raping her in Parliament House in March 2019. Bruce Lehrmann is not formally named as this man until the 7th of August 2021. He has maintained his innocence since then. 

The decision resulted in a 324 page document, Justice Lee saying that there were many “complexities” in the case, he also called out the “unexpected detours and collateral damage.” 

I could write out everything that Justice Lee decided on, but at 324 page, both you and I do not have the time. I have instead settled on sharing some of his key findings from the case. 

Justice Lee said that Brittany Higgins was an “unsatisfactory witness” while describing Lehrmann as a “poor witness” was an “understatement”. 

In regards to the interview with Higgins that aired on Ten, Justice Lee found that Lehrmann was identifiable, despite not being named. With this, he had “no doubt.” 

Lehrmann was found that have given “deliberate lies” by providing false evidence, of which Justice Lee gave some examples including the inconsistencies with him finding Higgins “alluring”. 

Just last week the court heard last-minute evidence from Taylor Auerbach, a former producer of Spotlight on the Seven Network. Justice Lee relayed that he found it unnecessary to make findings about many of the aspects that were produced from this. However, he did say that this evidence suggested that Lehrmann was “less than candid” about the benefits he received from Seven Network. Justice Lee also commented that he was satisfied that Lehrmann “made, or caused to be made false representations” about how Seven came to have a range of material it used in the program. 

On Higgins, Justice Lee said that in 2019, she tried to portray conduct “in a better light… but by 2021, and afterwards, most were part of a broader narrative or theme that she and her boyfriend wished others to believe, and it appears others wanted to believe.” He went on to say, “Ms Higgins crafted a narrative accusing others of putting up roadblocks… [and] having to choose between her career and seeking justice by making and pursuing a complaint.” 

Fiona Brown, was at the time, the chief of staff for Senator Linda Reynolds. Justice Lee said that the evidence suggested that Ms Brown “went out of her way” to support Higgins at the time, and “to be later vilified as an unfeeling apparatchik… must be worse than galling.”

In 2022 Lisa Wilkinson used her Logies speech to thank Brittany Higgins or trusting her, and The Project team with her story. This speech was used by Lehrmanns lawyers to argue that it was a potential “contempt of court” in his upcoming criminal trial, which resulted in the trial being delayed. Justice Lee said that Ms Wilkinson was “let down” by her legal counsel when she sought their advice prior to that speech, BUT as an experienced journalist she should have known the speech was “fraught with danger.” 

Justice Lee determined that Ten publishing the allegation was NOT reasonable - “Defamatory imputations of rape fell short of the standard of reasonableness.” He then criticised the effort that Network Ten took when attempting to get a response from Lehrmann, “He was not living the life of a hermit. He was working for a public relations firm in Sydney.” He also commented that those behind the episode should have done more to follow up on contradictory information that was provided by the prime minister's office.

During the trial the CCTV footage from The Dock was shown, this is the bar where Brittany Higgins and Bruce Lehrmann interacted before going to Parliament House. The CCTV clearly showed that Lehrmann had purchased drinks for Higgins, despite him continually denying this. Justice Lee considered that an “important aspect of their interactions leading up to the incident later that night.” Six of eleven drinks that Higgins consumed had been purchased for her by Lehrmann, “I do not accept Mr Lehrmann’s submissions” that only nine drinks were consumed.

Justice Lee also confirmed that the evidence showed Lehrmann spent “most of the evening” with Higgins, which is contradictory to Lehrmann saying that he and Higgins had “brief social interactions or incidental conversations or nothing of substance.”

How the two ended up at Parliament House later in the evening has been a debated topic. Higgins said in one account that she believed she was going home and Lehrmann had to collect something from work. It has been revealed that earlier in the evening Lehrmann had told Fiona Brown he was going back to “drink some whisky”. Justice Lee rejected Lehrmann's account that Higgins had told him that she also needed to go back to Parliament House. He also doubted that Lehrmann needed to collect his keys. 

Justice Lee concluded that he considers “Mr Lehrmann’s account to be an elaborate fancy.”

The effects of the alcohol that night were hard to determine, Justice Lee saying that “it’s an inherently imprecise exercise based wholly upon assumptions” to ascertain how drunk Higgins was. “I’m comfortably satisfied that Ms Higgins was a very drunk 24-year-old woman and her cognitive abilities were significantly impacted.” He also found that Lehrmann was aware of her state of intoxication. 

Bruce Lehrmann and Brittany Higgins did have sexual intercourse on the couch, Justice Lee has determined. He however, is not satisfied that Higgins said “no” on a loop, “I think it’s more likely than not that… she was passive, as she later said, like a ‘log’ during the entirety of the sexual act.”

He went on… “Although I am not satisfied there was clear verbal protest [from Ms Higgins].. Any suggestion that some form of active resistance is determined for the question of consent will be discarded.” 

Justice Lee was not satisfied that Lehrmann had been given consent, “So intent upon gratification… [Lehrmann] went ahead with sexual intercourse without caring whether or not she consented.”

“Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins.” It was said. 

Quick reminder, although the court found that Bruce Lehrmann did rape Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in 2019, this was a civil defamation trial. The burden of proof is less than a criminal trial, and this finding will not lead to any criminal punishment.

And now, the result of the defamation trial. Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson has failed. 

“[Mr Lehrmann] has now been found, at the civil standard of proof, to engage in a great wrong. It follows Ms Higgins has been proven to be the victim of sexual assault.” 

“Having escaped the lions den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of coming back for his hat.” 

Damages and costs will be determined at a later stage. 

It breaks my heart that a woman has had to go through SO much, just to have someone *official* say ‘Yes, your experience is valid, you were raped, we acknowledge that.’

Brittany Higgins has spent the last five years of her life living with her memories and trauma of that rape, having had it replayed and pulled apart on so many different occasions. She persisted, and today she was rewarded with vindication. 

Thank you for giving a voice to women everywhere, Brittany Higgins, we’re sorry it took this long for your truth to be recognised.