Lisa Wilkinson has denied “coaching” Brittany Higgins to give answers about why she didn’t proceed with a police complaint in 2019, a court has heard.
Bruce Lehrmann is suing Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson over her The Project interview with Brittany Higgins in February 2021.
During the interview, Ms Higgins alleged she was raped by her former colleague in Parliament House in the early hours of March 23, 2019.
Mr Lehrmann has consistently denied having any sexual contact with Ms Higgins inside Senator Linda Reynolds’ office and claims he was defamed by the story.
Ms Wilkinson gave evidence to the court on Thursday and is due to return to the witness box on Friday.
“SPEAK ABOUT THE CULTURE”
The court has heard that on March 13, 2019, Ms Higgins emailed an ACT police officer, informing them she did not want to proceed with an official complaint.
However it was revived around the time The Project went to air in February, 2021.
Ms Wilkinson was on Thursday afternoon grilled about an interaction between Ms Wilkinson and Ms Higgins during a pre-interview meeting in January 2021.
The court heard that Ms Wilkinson told the former political staffer: “The answer you really need to think about is why didn’t you press charges … I have every confidence that you will answer that very eloquently but it’s the one you really need to think about.”
Ms Wilkinson added: “Speak about the culture. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but if you can enunciate the fact this place is all about suppression of people’s natural sense of justice.
“Because you see around you the way this place works … This is everything you ever wanted and either you play by their rules or you’re out of there.”
Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson SC said: “I want to suggest you were attempting to coach Ms Higgins here.”
“I disagree,” Ms Higgins said.
“It was inappropriate conduct as a journalist,” Mr Richardson said.
“I disagree,” Ms Wilkinson said, before she further disagreed that she “crossed the line”.
Mr Richardson suggested that Ms Wilkinson posed the suggestion to Ms Higgins because viewers would be less likely to believe her story if she gave a poor response.
“If she had an answer that we thought was a poor answer, that wasn’t credible, we wouldn’t have put this story to air,” Ms Wilkinson said.
ROADBLOCKS
Ms Wilkinson on Thursday detailed to the court what she described as “roadblocks” to Ms Higgins’ allegations being investigated by police.
The court heard that in the introduction to The Project program, Ms Wilkinson said: “Tonight, claims of rape, roadblocks to a police investigation and a young woman forced to choose between her career and the pursuit of justice.”
Ms Wilkinson was on Thursday questioned about what she believed were “roadblocks” to the police investigating Ms Higgins’ allegations.
She pointed to the fact that police were not called when Ms Higgins was found naked in Senator Reynolds’ office and that Parliament House did not have a HR department to deal with sexual assault allegations.
She also cited that ACT Police were not given access to the Parliament House CCTV by the AFP.
The court has heard that Ms Reynolds and Ms Brown called Ms Higgins into a meeting inside the office where Ms Higgins alleges the rape occurred.
Ms Wilkinson described holding the meeting in that room as a further roadblock, saying Ms Higgins felt “deeply intimidated”.
“I want to suggest to you that has nothing to do with a police investigation that hadn’t even started yet,” Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson said.
“How a young woman feels after being raped, Mr Richardson, has a significant effect on whether or not a young woman feels like she can continue with a police investigation in a workplace where she was about to… become a political problem,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“It was close to a federal election that the Liberal Party were not expected to win.
“She loved the Liberal Party, she wanted to have a long career working for the Liberal Party.
“She felt a pressure that resulted in her not wanting to proceed with the police investigation.”
“POLITICAL COVER UP”
Ms Wilkinson told the court that as The Project story was being edited, she was in a state of mind that a political “cover-up” of Ms Higgins’ allegations had occurred.
“Did you believe... That there had been a systemic cover-up of a rape allegation or not,” Justice Michael Lee asked.
“Yes, I believed there was a lot of damage control going on within the Prime Minister’s Office to keep this whole thing under wraps,” Ms Wilkinson said.
Asked about her basis for that belief, Ms Wilkinson pointed to the fact two members of then-Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s office, including his top advisor Yaron Finkelstein, had showed up in Linda Reynolds’ office two days after the allegations were made.
She also said Ms Higgins had received a phone call from a senior member of Mr Morrison’s staff “on politically-sensitive days for the Liberal Party”.
Ms Wilkinson described those events as “pretty significant, in my mind”.
Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson asserted that Ms Higgins had no knowledge of what was said in the meeting between the two members of the Prime Minister’s staff and Senator Reynolds’ chief of staff Fiona Brown.
“No but she had never seen them in the office before,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“She’d only been working for Reynolds, how long, three weeks?” Mr Richardson asked.
“At that stage,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“I want to suggest to you it was completely unreasonable for you to draw the inference that meant something sinister,” Mr Richardson said.
“I know how politics works, Mr Richardson,” Ms Wilkinson replied.
“That’s your answer?” Mr Richardson asked.
“Yes it is,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“THAT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE A COVER-UP”
Ms Wilkinson has been grilled about her allegations that Senator Reynolds, and her chief of staff Fiona Brown, were involved in a “cover up”.
“I’m trying to get to your understanding, at the time the program was broadcast, you had the view, didn’t you, that Ms Brown and Senator Reynolds were involved in a systemic cover-up or not, were they participants in the systemic cover-up or not?” Justice Michael Lee said.
“I believe that they have been very, very careful in the lead-up to a tightly contested election and that they would have been taking a lot of direction from the Prime Minister’s office,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“So were they participants in a systemic cover up, knowingly or unknowingly, or unwittingly or wittingly, or what was your view at the time?” Justice Lee asked.
“I think they were taking orders from the Prime Minister’s office, whatever those orders were,” Ms Wilkinson
“So does that mean that your view was that they were knowing participants in a systemic cover up?” Justice Lee asked.
“I think it follows that they were,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“You’d agree that would be wicked conduct … Being involved in the systemic cover up of a rape allegation,” Justice Lee said.
“Yeah, it was about keeping the details away from the media,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“As we know, Senator Cash was aware of contact made by the Canberra Times about Ms Higgins being raped on a couch in Linda Reynolds’ office,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“It was starting to get out and they managed to quieten the story down. The story disappeared. That sounds to me like a cover-up.”
ALARM BELLS
Ms Wilkinson was on Thursday grilled about a photo of a bruise which Ms Higgins provided to producer Angus Llewellyn during a five-hour pre-interview discussion in January, 2021.
At the time, Ms Higgins claimed she he had suffered the bruise during the alleged assault.
However, during her evidence to the Federal Court last week, Ms Higgins conceded the bruise may have been suffered when she fell on the stairs at a bar earlier in the night.
As well, the court heard that in her pre-interview for The Project, Ms Higgins claimed that her phone had “completely died” after she took screenshots of messages with Linda Reynolds and Michaelia Cash.
Around the time, Ms Higgins had asked also people in Ms Reynolds’ office for someone’s phone number.
During the pre-interview discussion, the court heard, Ms Higgins told Ms Wilkinson and Mr Llewellyn: “I think (the government) have got the capability to do it. I know they can do it. I know they can remote wipe phones. I know that’s not unheard of.”
Ms Wilkinson told the court she found Ms Higgins’ statements “curious”.
Asked by Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson SC whether it raised questions about her reliability, Ms Wilkinson said: “It made me think she was a very scared young woman.”
The court heard that Ms Wilkinson texted Mr Llewellyn about potential inconsistencies in her claims that her phone had died while at the same time she still had the bruise photo.
“I want to zero in on this whole phone thing,” Ms Wilkinson wrote in the text message.
Ms Wilkinson further said: “If she believes she took screenshots of crucial messages she no longer has, how come she still has the bruise shot?
“I’m confused on this point.”
Ms Wilkinson said it raised “alarm bells” and asked Mr Llewellyn to raise the issue with Ms Higgins.
“She no longer has critical screenshot messages,” Mr Richardson said.
“Yes, I’m raising alarm bells,” Ms Wilkinson said of her messages to Mr Llewellyn.
“But at the same time you knew she had the bruise photograph,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Yes,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“You saw that as a problem, didn’t you,” Mr Richardson said.
“I did,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Those things didn’t fit together,” Mr Richardson asked.
“I was having trouble marrying the two, yes,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“I want to suggest to you at this point you believed this issue presented a potential significant credibility issue for your source,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Correct,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“TABLOID”
Ms Wilkinson has angrily denied that she was riveted by the “commercial appeal” of Ms Higgins’ allegations and failed to challenge any of her statements, declaring she was not a “cheap tabloid” journalist.
The court heard that after she recorded their interview, Ms Wilkinson texted Ms Higgins saying: “Brittany, just wanted to say thank you once again for your openness, honesty and eloquence. You did something truly magnificent today.”
Ms Wilkinson denied that she was intent on not challenging any of Ms Higgins’ assertions.
“You were thrilled by the riveting commercial appeal of the story that she told,” Mr Richardson said.
“Please don’t make me sound like a cheap tabloid journalist, Mr Richardson,” Ms Wilkinson said during a tense exchange.
THE LOGIES SPEECH
Ms Wilkinson was on Thursday morning grilled about her Logies acceptance speech on June 19, 2022 - eight days before Mr Lehrmann’s ACT Supreme Court trial was due to begin.
The court heard Ms Wilkinson had been subpoenaed to be a witness in Mr Lehrmann’s criminal trial, which was due to begin on June 27, 2022.
The court heard that during the speech, won for The Project’s interview with Ms Higgins, Ms Wilkinson said: “As Brittany warned me before we went to air, her story would be seen by many of the most powerful people in this country, not as a human problem, but as a political problem.
“Brittany, was a political problem. And governments tend to like political problems to go away. But Brittany never did.
“And the truth is this honour belongs to Brittany. It belongs to a 26-year-old woman’s unwavering courage, it belongs to a woman who said ‘enough’.”
The speech resulted in Mr Lehrmann’s trial being delayed until October that year.
That trial was aborted due to juror misconduct before a retrial was abandoned due to concerns about Ms Higgins’ mental health.
No findings have been made against Mr Lehrmann and he continues to deny the allegation.
Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson SC questioned whether Ms Wilkinson was, through her speech, communicating to “hundreds of thousands of people that you believe Ms Higgins’ allegations.”
“I didn’t say that in that speech Mr Richardson,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“I want to suggest, you put your pride and your ego ahead of my client’s right to a fair trial when you gave that speech,” Mr Richardson asked.
“I completely disagree,” Ms Wilkinson said.
Justice Michael Lee asked: “Would you accept that a woman would not be demonstrating ‘unwavering courage’ if was making a false allegation of rape against an innocent man?”
“Yes I accept that,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“Doesn’t it follow if you said that someone is showing ‘unwavering courage’, it means they’re making a true allegation of rape against a guilty man,” Justice Lee asked.
“Yes,” Ms Wilkinson said.
“EXPLOSIVE”
The Project producer Angus Llewellyn spent the last two days in the witness box.
According to Mr Llewellyn’s affidavit, he was first alerted to the story when Ms Wilkinson messaged him on January 19, 2021 saying: “I have an explosive political story for Sunday Project.
“Rang Craig and Sarah and we’re going huge with it.
“March release. I have told Craig I only want to work with you on it. He agrees. Call me when you can.”
Mr Llewellyn replied the next day: “Sounds intriguing! ... can jump on it from Friday if needed? Is it for this Sunday? If it’s not then I’m back from leave on Monday and can hit it then.”
Later that day Ms Wilkinson replied, describing the story as: “an extraordinary coverup involving Linda Reynolds, Michaelia Cash and the PMO.”
“Sarah thinks it is so explosive we should do it over three segments from 7pm … The woman at the centre of it all is ready to talk. She is based in Canberra. We can fly her up.”
“PARANOID”
Meanwhile, Ms Higgins was worried about “who might be keeping a close eye on her”, according to an email which was sent by her fiance, the court has heard.
The Federal Court on Wednesday released an email sent by her fiance David Sharaz to Ms Wilkinson, with the subject heading “Everything you need”.
Attached to the email was a “timeline” of Ms Higgins’ allegations and an explanation of key figures in the story.
“Hi Lisa, Thank you for your time over the phone today, and your sensitivity around what I truly feel is an injustice,” Mr Sharaz begins the email.
“I’m sending this on behalf of Britt, purely because, and this sounds paranoid, we just don’t know who might be keeping a close eye on her.”
Mr Sharaz added: “In addition to this I’ve gone and looked up the ACT Policing crime stats for 2019 and there was one reported sexual assault during the time Britt’s incident occurred.”
The trial, before Justice Michael Lee, continues.
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7r7HWrGWcp51jrrZ7zZqroqeelrlwutKwZJqbpGSwsMHRrapmpJGsfK210ppksKGcoLavv86nZK2nXamurLGMrZ%2BeZaOprq%2BwjKKlZqSVnb%2Burc2nZJ2dlpa6osDIqKVmrKKerq17zZ6urGWjqbyzxY6fa2xrkm6EprGTaWhwbGGYgnGvwWtuaZyUZn5zrsBunQ%3D%3D