Gee Bruce Lehrmann seems like such an honest and credible fella. Can't believe his defamation case is being reopened...... who could possibly think he'd ever perjure himself?
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Bruce Lehrmann’s found guilty (to civil standard of evidence)
- Thread starter TrialByVideo
- Start date
Guilty! 10 years without parole with the hard cases. I hope he meets Big Bubba.
Bruce Lehrmann defamation trial judgment live updates: Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins, judge finds on balance of probabilities – latest news
Lehrmann is suing Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson in the federal court of Australia for defamation. Follow the latest news and updates from the judgment today
Judge not buying lehrmanns case.
We may find this out soon enough. I believe there will be another hearing to decide costs.
Pretty clear it was Kerry Stokes (Seven Media) right?
Same bloke bankrolled Ben Roberts-Smith and Christian Porter's legal bills.
Good to Seven's brand in the toilet over this if it wasn't already.
That was for his rape trial.
I don’t know whether Stokes is covering this one, it’s his defamation case. Hopefully he’s not and not chipping in for the oppositions legal fees.
Sad that both BRS and Lehrmannn still walking the streets, not in jail
the Judge let the tosser have it as well:
“In summary, I consider it more likely than not in those early hours, after a long night of conviviality and drinking and having successfully brought Ms Higgins back to a secluded place, Mr Lehrmann was hellbent on having sex with a woman he found attractive” and knew was inebriated.
“Having escaped the lion’s den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat,”
“He did not care one way or the other whether Ms Higgins understood or agreed to what was going on.”
“Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins.”
“In summary, I consider it more likely than not in those early hours, after a long night of conviviality and drinking and having successfully brought Ms Higgins back to a secluded place, Mr Lehrmann was hellbent on having sex with a woman he found attractive” and knew was inebriated.
“Having escaped the lion’s den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat,”
“He did not care one way or the other whether Ms Higgins understood or agreed to what was going on.”
“Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins.”
Yeah. I am not sure it’s stokes. Surely his legal team must have gone into this expecting to be paid , unless they did a “ no win no fee" deal
Last edited:
Bruce Lehrmann Suddenly Remembers He Initiated This Fucking Trial — The Shovel
"Who's the absolute dipshit who had the nerve to start these court proceedings in the first place? Oh, wait ..."
theshovel.com.au
Stokes funded BRS defamation trial right Willo? I wonder who it could be, having KCs plus barristers for a trial this long won't be cheap. KCs won't work on a no win no fee basis either... Why would they if they can get $20k per day.
Don’t quote me on the exact number but I remember reading about the discussions that were going on between Lisa Wilkinson and channel 10 because she decided to use her own legal team. ( Sue Chrysanthou who seems to be representing a lot of high profile people these days)
The number I recall on her fees was $800k-$1 million. You would expect his to be at least that, probably more.
Pretty sure he wouldn’t have that sort of coin and the defendants also might be awarded costs on top of that.
As an aside the Channel 10 lawyer referred to the fact that Bruce Lehrmann is now studying law
. He suggested that he might like to change Uni coursesDon’t quote me on the exact number but I remember reading about the discussions that were going on between Lisa Wilkinson and channel 10 because she decided to use her own legal team. ( Sue Chrysanthou who seems to be representing a lot of high profile people these days)
The number I recall on her fees was $800k-$1 million. You would expect his to be at least that, probably more.
Pretty sure he wouldn’t have that sort of coin and the defendants also might be awarded costs on top of that.
As an aside the Channel 10 lawyer referred to the fact that Bruce Lehrmann is now studying law
A lot riding on how Justice Lee determines costs!
Maybe a masseuse course.Don’t quote me on the exact number but I remember reading about the discussions that were going on between Lisa Wilkinson and channel 10 because she decided to use her own legal team. ( Sue Chrysanthou who seems to be representing a lot of high profile people these days)
The number I recall on her fees was $800k-$1 million. You would expect his to be at least that, probably more.
Pretty sure he wouldn’t have that sort of coin and the defendants also might be awarded costs on top of that.
As an aside the Channel 10 lawyer referred to the fact that Bruce Lehrmann is now studying law
One comment was that Lehmann “escaped the lions den but when back to get his hat”
Referring to the criminal case being dropped but then he wanted to make a few $million from the defamation case.
It might just be a Civil Case but I’m glad Brittany Higgins got some satisfaction from this prick not making any more money out of him raping her.
Heres an article I found. I’m not sure of the veracity or just supposition
———————————————-————-
The colossal cost of the Bruce Lehrmann trials
We break down the expenses behind the mass of court cases that have roiled Australia's political and media landscape.CHARLIE LEWIS
APR 15, 2024
Share
The judgment in the defamation case brought by former Liberal staffer Bruce Lehrmann against Network Ten and its former employee Lisa Wilkinson will be handed down today.
Lehrmann instigated the case following an interview broadcast in February 2021 on The Project featuring his former colleague Brittany Higgins, who alleged she was raped by a colleague. Lehrmann, who denies the allegation, was not named until later, but he argues he was made identifiable in the interview.
In the latest instalment of Paint by Numbers, Crikey’s series about the big issues of the day told via the numbers, we break down the mass of court cases — and their expenses — that have roiled Australia’s political and media landscape ever since.
***
Number of court cases and inquiries relating to the allegations against Lehrmann: 17 (six ongoing and 11 concluded separately)
Number of defamation cases brought by Lehrmann against media companies: 3
Amount News Corp paid Lehrmann to settle: $295,000
Amount the ABC paid Lehrmann to settle: $150,000
Amount Seven allegedly spent on Thai massages for Lehrmann and others while negotiating the interview Lehrmann conducted with Seven’s Spotlightprogram: $10,000
Amount Seven allegedly paid, according to former producer Taylor Auerbach, to cover Lehrmann’s “expenditure on cocaine and prostitutes”: $750(Lehrmann denies this)
Total cost of the case brought by Lehrmann against Network Ten: at least $10 million
Amount spent on Lehrmann’s rent by Seven: at least $4,000 per month for a year
The colossal cost of the Bruce Lehrmann trials
We break down the expenses behind the mass of court cases that have roiled Australia's political and media landscape.
www.crikey.com.au
Network 10 could be out of pocket $8m after Bruce Lehrmann win
By ADELAIDE LANG7:03PM APRIL 15, 2024
Network 10 could be out of pocket for millions despite scoring a resounding victory in the defamation lawsuit brought by Bruce Lehrmann, a leading defamation lawyer has revealed.
On Monday, Justice Michael Lee ruled the media company had not defamed Lehrmann by airing an interview with Brittany Higgins on The Project in which she alleged she had been raped by a fellow political staffer in Parliament House during March 2019.
The justice found Lehrmann had been so “hellbent on having sex” that he “did not care one way or another whether Ms Higgins understood or agreed to what was going on”.
He ruled in favour of Network 10 and said the question of costs would be determined at a later date.
MinterEllison partner Peter Bartlett, who successfully led Nine’s defence against Ben Roberts-Smith’s defamation claims, estimated Network 10 and its former presenter Lisa Wilkinson have paid $8m to defend themselves in the defamation case brought by Lehrmann.
Despite the victory, Mr Bartlett said the media company will likely face difficulties in recouping their multimillion dollar costs from Lehrmann, who is currently unemployed.
“By all appearances, Lehrmann doesn’t have a deep pocket,” he said.
“So clearly Channel 10 will be out of pocket because they won’t be able to recover that quantum of costs from Lehrmann.”
Mr Bartlett noted Network 10 could have Lehrmann declared as bankrupt, but it would still be a challenge “to get blood out of a stone”.
“At best they’re going to be able to get a couple of hundred thousand dollars but they’re not going to be able to get much,” he surmised.
He drew parallels with the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation fight, in which Nine were able to compel media magnate Kerry Stokes to pay costs because they had funded the lawsuit.
“If there was evidence that someone is funding Lehrmann, there could be an application against that person or company to pay them costs,” Mr Bartlett said.
However, he opined the costs hearing was unlikely to be the end of the legal battle.
Mr Bartlett found there was “little doubt” Lehrmann would appeal Justice Lee’s findings against him due to “the complexity of the case, the complexity of the findings of the judge, (and) the conflicting evidence given by various witnesses”.
“The appeal would not, on the face of it, be an impossible appeal,” he assessed.
“But (it is) probably unlikely to succeed.”
It is also possible police might pursue a contempt of court charge against Lehrmann for leaking protected court documents to be used in an interview with Channel 7’s spotlight program.
Justice Lee found Lehrmann had “wrongly provided” a Seven producer with access to information which had been used in his criminal trial and which was meant to be protected from further distribution by a legal undertaking.
“He could be criminally charged,” Mr Bartlett said.
“I query whether the police have better things to do than worry about Mr Lehrmann any further, but time will tell.”
Justice Lee’s landmark decision on Monday would also have a bearing on Ms Higgins’ ongoing legal fight with Senator Linda Reynolds in Western Australia, Mr Bartlett said.
The senator claims her former employee defamed her in two social media posts in July last year which related to Ms Higgins’ allegations she was raped by Mr Lehrmann.
Mr Bartlett said Justice Lee’s determination that Lehrmann was guilty would give Ms Higgins “great confidence”.
“(Although) simply because Lehrmann has lost and lost comprehensively doesn’t necessarily mean Reynolds is going to lose, because her case is completely different,” he cautioned.
Despite the bombshell findings, the defamation lawyer said he would be “very surprised” if Ms Higgins decided to launch her own defamation lawsuit on the basis of Justice Lee’s findings.
“I would have thought she is sick and tired of lawyers and sick and tired of all the litigation that’s been going on,” he said.
In a statement, Network 10 hailed Justice Lee’s decision as “vindication for the courageous Brittany Higgins who gave a voice to women across the nation.”
“This judgment is a triumph for truth,” the statement said
