Updated The Bruce Lehrmann Trials Pt2 * Justice Lee - "Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins."

[Kurve]

Here is PART 1

Historical Rape Allegation Against Fmr AG Christian Porter
The Alexander Matters matters

Just a reminder, this is the crime board and we need to be aware that there will be victims of crime either watching this thread or engaging in here from time to time. A degree of respect in all discussions is expected.

LINK TO TIMELINE
CJS INQUIRY
FINAL REPORT – BOARD OF INQUIRY – CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
Joint media statement – Chief Minister and Attorney-General

LINK TO FEDERAL COURT DEFAMATION PROCEEDINGS

 

[Lady O]

I thought the government paid the 'lying cow' defamation case which was under the leadership of Morrison and it's Reynolds legal fees after that she's trying to recoup from Higgins. Dreyfus refused to cover her for them.

From another news report:

"Reynolds, not the taxpayer, is footing her bill."

 

[Kurve]

From another news report:

"Reynolds, not the taxpayer, is footing her bill."

Morrison came out later and said his government would cover any of his ministers costs in the fallout. It's in this thread somewhere.

 

[Lady O]

Morrison came out later and said his government would cover any of his ministers costs in the fallout. It's in this thread somewhere.

I think the Government of the day pays their minister's legal costs. If there was any other costs (plaintiff's legal and/or compensation) then I believe this is up to the minister to pay.

 

[Kurve]

I think the Government of the day pays their minister's legal costs. If there was any other costs (plaintiff's legal and/or compensation) then I believe this is up to the minister to pay.

My understanding at the time was that the government paid out the 'lying cow' case. It was a trifling amount anyway in the bigger scheme of things.

Reynolds isn't looking simply to be paid for that, if it even did come out of her pocket. That's not what's motivating her imo.

 

[Satan]

My understanding at the time was that the government paid out the 'lying cow' case. It was a trifling amount anyway in the bigger scheme of things.

Reynolds isn't looking simply to be paid for that, if it even did come out of her pocket. That's not what's motivating her imo.

Apology?

 

[MrsBlueSky]

She made her call all by herself.

From the report of the extremely high number of sexual assaults not investigated by police, how many of those do you think were not investigated because it was the victims's call?

The report found only one in seven people accused of raping a child will likely even know they were named as a suspect, much less be investigated, charged, prosecuted or convicted.

The number of cases in which police will approach a suspect only rises from 15 to 17 per cent in cases where the victim is over 16.

 

[Lady O]

Apology?

Probably more like an admission that she lied.

 

[FIGJAM]

From the report of the extremely high number of sexual assaults not investigated by police, how many of those do you think were not investigated because it was the victims's call?

The report found only one in seven people accused of raping a child will likely even know they were named as a suspect, much less be investigated, charged, prosecuted or convicted.

The number of cases in which police will approach a suspect only rises from 15 to 17 per cent in cases where the victim is over 16.

I've got no idea on the bolded. The quoted article had some admittedly shocking numbers at the top, but I'd be hoping that there was plenty more detail in the study on a host of other factors such as victims dropping charges and the like.

I had a mate who worked in the sex crimes squad here in Melbourne and he only lasted about 18 months. Initially he thought the idea of locking up rapists and especially pedos was appealing. And many of us mentally think of a rape charge as something that has just happened, or happened in the past few weeks, so it's a live investigation.

What he found however, was that overwhelming majority of allegations were years or decades old. In his words, he felt "more like a counsellor who's there to listen" because in the overwhelming majority of these historical cases, they knew that a prosecutable case would be unbelievably difficult to achieve.

That's not to say they were lazy or flippant about the claims either. They recorded everything and if something could be done they'd do it. And even if they couldn't do a deep dive into the claims for whatever reason, recording them is of benefit if there are repeated claims against an individual.

I feel like the SBS article paints a picture that there's completely disinterested coppers writing a few notes from a rape victim, plugging it into a database and then hitting the donut store. I'm not suggesting the stats are great or that there is no significant room for improvement, but there are most likely some reasons as to why the sex crime stats may always look poor relative to other crimes.

 

[Festerz]

The report found only one in seven people accused of raping a child will likely even know they were named as a suspect, much less be investigated, charged, prosecuted or convicted.

The number of cases in which police will approach a suspect only rises from 15 to 17 per cent in cases where the victim is over 16.

Yes it is shocking.

It's an 128 page independent review conducted by the ACT Government established to look into the reasons why the AFP/ACT Police has the worst attrition rate for sexual assault in the nation.

The detailed review conducted consultations and structured interviews with 33 victim survivors - most of whom were women and girls 16 years or older. The Steering Committee for the review included The Chief Police Officer for the AFP and ACT Policing, Neil Gaughan and full access was given to relevant ACT Police data sets and case materials.

Doesn't apply in this case, as it was the complainant who decided not to proceed.

Actually complainant withdrawal of sexual assault reports in the ACT outstrips the rate for other jurisdictions and it IS one of the issues investigated in the Report with findings made about how the ACT reporting process, including the lack of proper process and follow up to the initial 'Meet and Greet' interviews, contribute to this.

The report makes clear that the 21 February 2019 (alleged) rape of Brittany Higgins by Bruce Lehrmann and concerns about how the ACT Police handled the matter formed an important part of the context for the establishment of review. However, the date of the original report and the fact the ACT did restart investigations into the Lehrmann matter in 2021 following the project interview eventually proceeding to charge, renders it outside the the scope of the study.

From the report of the extremely high number of sexual assaults not investigated by police, how many of those do you think were not investigated because it was the victims's call?

The study found that forty two per cent of the cases analysed in the police process review were closed by way of victim withdrawal. Police typically refer to such cases as 'complaint withdrawn by victim

However, the study demonstrates that victims are not usually the ones withdrawing their complaint:

'victim survivors are disengaging from the police process which they describe as triggering.'

And while Ms Higgins did withdraw her initial 2019 sexual assault report voluntarily after the initial 'Meet and Greet' interview with ACT Police , her vivid descriptions of the ACT Police interview and reporting process in the subsequent 2021 investigation resonate with the accounts detailed by many (but not all) victim-survivors in the report of the formal interview process.

The 'Meet and Greet' process, which Ms Higgins experienced in 2019 is typically the first step in the interview process for those reporting sexual assault. It comes in for a fair amount of criticism in the report, not so much for any negative impact on victims, but for the lack of rigorous reporting and follow through on the police side which partly contributed to the high report withdrawal rates.

A detailed set of recommendations have been made to reform the way in which the ACT Police and their SACAT Team (no longer headed by Det Supt Scott Moller) investigations into sexual assault offences and allegations in the ACT.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Lol

 

[FIGJAM]

Whilst the ACT police may have a generally poor record in the sex crimes area (and Detective Supernintendo Moller has detailed reasons why), I am not sure how it all relates to Higgins' investigation specifically.

If you're interested in the police proceedings, you can read between paragraphs 668 and 707 of Justice Lee's recent verdict, to see how thorough they were, including investigating even when the complaint was off the table, the support that Higgins received and the consistent follow up calls on the matter.

And intertwined within this section, is Higgins' ultimate motivation as to why she didn't proceed.

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2024/2024fca0369

 

[Festerz]

Lol


View attachment 1981971

Had my own smart arse witty comments about this, but these trump mine:



Edit:

What I imagined Lady Gaenor Meakes to look line:



What she actually looks like:

 

[Kurve]

 

[MrsBlueSky]

Yes it is shocking.

It's an 128 page independent review conducted by the ACT Government established to look into the reasons why the AFP/ACT Police has the worst attrition rate for sexual assault in the nation.

The detailed review conducted consultations and structured interviews with 33 victim survivors - most of whom were women and girls 16 years or older.

The most disgusting thing that I've heard is of a young girl going to a police station to report being raped. The policemen who heard the story told her he wasn't sure if police could do anything and got her to retell the story to another policeman. In turn he asked her to repeat it to the policeman in charge and she was told there was not enough evidence to get a conviction.
The girl said she felt the three male police officers were getting her to tell all the sordid details for their own sexual delight.
If that is true then that is atrocious.
No wonder victims of sexual assault don't come forward.
Rapists like Bruce Lehrmann are being aided and abetted by an incompetent reporting system.

 

[Kurve]

One here, facing court for sexual assault of a victim whose report he was taking, with an erection.

Sydney cop faces court over sexual assault charges

www.9news.com.au

 

[Kurve]

This is current, she was only 19yo.

Sex crimes detective raped woman whose complaint he was investigating, court told

Glen Coleman allegedly raped the 19-year-old woman at a police station and sexually touched her without her consent in his police car.

www.watoday.com.au

 

[MrsBlueSky]

This is current, she was only 19yo.

Sex crimes detective raped woman whose complaint he was investigating, court told

Glen Coleman allegedly raped the 19-year-old woman at a police station and sexually touched her without her consent in his police car.

www.watoday.com.au

One here, facing court for sexual assault of a victim whose report he was taking, with an erection.

Sydney cop faces court over sexual assault charges

www.9news.com.au

FFS!!

 

[Mick F]

The most disgusting thing that I've heard is of a young girl going to a police station to report being raped. The policemen who heard the story told her he wasn't sure if police could do anything and got her to retell the story to another policeman. In turn he asked her to repeat it to the policeman in charge and she was told there was not enough evidence to get a conviction.
The girl said she felt the three male police officers were getting her to tell all the sordid details for their own sexual delight.
If that is true then that is atrocious.
No wonder victims of sexual assault don't come forward.
Rapists like Bruce Lehrmann are being aided and abetted by an incompetent reporting system.

Agree. There is a reason why they don’t come forward or pursue charges.

I don’t give a f*ck if the policeman, or supervisor, thinks they provided good support. It is what the woman feels/thinks that counts. That I even have to mention this, or such a review is necessary in 2024 is appalling.

 

[Festerz]

Agree. There is a reason why they don’t come forward or pursue charges.

I don’t give a f*ck if the policeman, or supervisor, thinks they provided good support. It is what the woman feels/thinks that counts. That I even have to mention this, or such a review is necessary in 2024 is appalling.

To be fair, the ACT Government (and the ACT Police Chief Officer who was part of the oversight group) is to be commended for taking the evidence of the statistics on the high rate of attrition of reported sexual offences in the ACT seriously and taking rigorous steps to try and understand the reasons behind them - including a systemic review of cases and detailed structured interviews with victim - survivors and their supporters.

The independent review found that:

- 'ACT Police decision-making was impacted by an acceptance of rape myths, that is, the widespread untruths that prevail about sexual violence'

- they 'demonstrated a fundamental lack of insight about the realities of sexual violence.'

- they 'demonstrated a misapplication of legal principles, including a belief that police must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt or in some cases the victims themselves must meet that benchmark'

- 'ACT Police were victim led only when it meant dropping a case, not when it meant pursuing one'

One of the Report's recommendations to the ACT Government and the ACT Police it to:

'Mandate an improved training program focussing of challenging rape myths and educating ACT Police officers about the dynamics of sexual violence, including grooming and coercive control, and the law related toi sexual offences (including evidence law).'

It's this most basic level of misunderstanding of the law by the ACT Police that is probably why the report was titled 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt?'.

After the disaster of the Sofronoff Inquiry it is good to see a facts based review of the policing components of the ACT criminal justice system that will hopefully lead to positive and substantial changes in the way ACT Police deal with sexual assault complaints. As I understand it the review, which was completed back in March, has already led to the implementation of some changes in structures and processes in the ACT Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Team (SACAT) with more substantial changes to come.

I'm sure there are lessons from this comprehensive review that will be relevant to the criminal justice systems of other jurisdictions. But are they willing to listen?

(As an aside I wonder how the findings of this review will impact the defamation action against the ACT Govt. launched last week by some current and former members of the SACAT unit. Sadly for the sake of transparency, but understandably given they financial and other risks involved, governments generally choose to settle such actions rather than contest the matter in court . Especially in this case where there is a great risk of even further damage being done to public confidence in the ACT justice system, already battered over recent years).

 

[FIGJAM]

Whilst the ACT obviously need to get their ducks in a row with respect to improving their performance and systems, the Sexual Assault Police Review also details some 'facts based' on-the-ground "collateral-damage" caused by Higgins' case post The Project.

All of the below is in relation to Operation Covina which is the code name for the Lehrmann investigations:








The exact issues behind the above unwillingness to proceed with charges are unclear. There are two things that are undeniable though, which are:

1. That Higgins post The Project interview copped a large amount of abuse and threats from idiots online and also had to deal with the usual right wing media types;
2. The Higgins within The Project interview projected the narrative that the police were unhelpful and put up roadblocks, among other claims of impropriety by her supervisors and security guards all of which have subsequently been found to have no basis in fact by Justice Lee.

Whilst some may gravitate exclusively to Point 1 above for the above two victims being filled with enough fear as to not to proceed with charges, I believe that it has to be a combination of the two points.

There are a number of issues falling out from this, with one being that Higgins' public exposure to idiots online is perceived (to some degree at least) as being normal, which it obviously is not.

Another is that Higgins "craft(ing) a narrative accusing others of putting up roadblocks" has put some fear into some victims as to the reliability of the police and other positions of authority (eg. security guards, bosses etc.).

Yes, the ACT cop shop needs to lift their performance. Yes, there are some bad hombres within the police force and some horror stories. But I still think that they are the most reliable avenue to justice and we shouldn't be propagating fear of them into our daughters (and sons).

Higgins (and Sharaz's) narrative of cover-ups through the media not only caused some victims to not proceed, but also caused significant delays to other cases as Operation Covina was given priority (one case was completely halted).







Full detail on Page 24 of the report:

https://www.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2440164/The-Sexual-Assault-Police-Review-Report.pdf

As one of the last lines of Justice Lee's verdict has stated:



It is lamentable that some of those within the "collateral damage" are victims of sexual assault themselves.

Whilst the justice system is always a 'work in progress' and in need of perpetual evolution, as well as being inherently slow AF, the negativity towards it is unhelpful. Contrast the current Toowoomba case versus the chain of events surrounding the Higgins case.

 

[Lady O]

Whilst the ACT obviously need to get their ducks in a row with respect to improving their performance and systems, the Sexual Assault Police Review also details some 'facts based' on-the-ground "collateral-damage" caused by Higgins' case post The Project.

All of the below is in relation to Operation Covina which is the code name for the Lehrmann investigations:


View attachment 1982561

View attachment 1982564

View attachment 1982565

The exact issues behind the above unwillingness to proceed with charges are unclear. There are two things that are undeniable though, which are:

1. That Higgins post The Project interview copped a large amount of abuse and threats from idiots online and also had to deal with the usual right wing media types;
2. The Higgins within The Project interview projected the narrative that the police were unhelpful and put up roadblocks, among other claims of impropriety by her supervisors and security guards all of which have subsequently been found to have no basis in fact by Justice Lee.

Whilst some may gravitate exclusively to Point 1 above for the above two victims being filled with enough fear as to not to proceed with charges, I believe that it has to be a combination of the two points.

There are a number of issues falling out from this, with one being that Higgins' public exposure to idiots online is perceived (to some degree at least) as being normal, which it obviously is not.

Another is that Higgins "craft(ing) a narrative accusing others of putting up roadblocks" has put some fear into some victims as to the reliability of the police and other positions of authority (eg. security guards, bosses etc.).

Yes, the ACT cop shop needs to lift their performance. Yes, there are some bad hombres within the police force and some horror stories. But I still think that they are the most reliable avenue to justice and we shouldn't be propagating fear of them into our daughters (and sons).

Higgins (and Sharaz's) narrative of cover-ups through the media not only caused some victims to not proceed, but also caused significant delays to other cases as Operation Covina was given priority (one case was completely halted).

View attachment 1982584

View attachment 1982586

View attachment 1982587

Full detail on Page 24 of the report:

https://www.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2440164/The-Sexual-Assault-Police-Review-Report.pdf

As one of the last lines of Justice Lee's verdict has stated:

View attachment 1982591

It is lamentable that some of those within the "collateral damage" are victims of sexual assault themselves.

Whilst the justice system is always a 'work in progress' and in need of perpetual evolution, as well as being inherently slow AF, the negativity towards it is unhelpful. Contrast the current Toowoomba case versus the chain of events surrounding the Higgins case.

Neither of your points 1 & 2 above would have been an issue if Higgins had simply remained anonymous and continued with her original Police complaint lodged in the days after the alleged assault.

 

[Festerz]

Bruce Lehrmann did not have secret financial backers funding his failed defamation case against Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson, a court has heard this morning.

As part of their efforts to recover their legal costs from Lehrmann, Network 10 was allowed to issue a notice to produce aimed at finding out if the ex-Liberal staffer had financial backers.

In answer to the notice to produce, Lehrmann’s solicitor told the court that there was no agreement between Lehrmann and any other parties to pay his lawyers’ fees.

“There is none such agreement, there is only an agreement between my firm and the applicant,” Mr Svilans said.

“That agreement makes no reference to any third party.”

Justice Lee added that the agreement stated that Lehrmann only had to pay his lawyers if he won the lawsuit.

(i.e. a no win no fee agreement)

“So it was a conditional costs agreement whereby there’s no obligation to pay the amount of costs in event the proceedings were unsuccessful,” Justice Lee told the court.

Justice Lee will now hand down a decision on the payment of Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson’s legal bills - and he is due to hand down his costs judgment on Friday afternoon at 2.15pm.

Justice Lee previously told the court late that there would be a costs order in Ten’s favour.

Lehrmann’s no-win, no-fee agreement with lawyers revealed in court

Network Ten sought access to documents revealing whether the former Liberal staffer had financial assistance in bringing his multimillion-dollar defamation case.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Brian Oblivion]

Bruce Lehrmann did not have secret financial backers funding his failed defamation case against Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson, a court has heard this morning.

As part of their efforts to recover their legal costs from Lehrmann, Network 10 was allowed to issue a notice to produce aimed at finding out if the ex-Liberal staffer had financial backers.

In answer to the notice to produce, Lehrmann’s solicitor told the court that there was no agreement between Lehrmann and any other parties to pay his lawyers’ fees.

“There is none such agreement, there is only an agreement between my firm and the applicant,” Mr Svilans said.

“That agreement makes no reference to any third party.”

Justice Lee added that the agreement stated that Lehrmann only had to pay his lawyers if he won the lawsuit.

(i.e. a no win no fee agreement)

“So it was a conditional costs agreement whereby there’s no obligation to pay the amount of costs in event the proceedings were unsuccessful,” Justice Lee told the court.

Justice Lee will now hand down a decision on the payment of Network 10 and Ms Wilkinson’s legal bills - and he is due to hand down his costs judgment on Friday afternoon at 2.15pm.

Justice Lee previously told the court late that there would be a costs order in Ten’s favour.

Lehrmann’s no-win, no-fee agreement with lawyers revealed in court

Network Ten sought access to documents revealing whether the former Liberal staffer had financial assistance in bringing his multimillion-dollar defamation case.

www.theage.com.au

Knock me down with a feather.

 

[Festerz]

Knock me down with a feather.

It surprises me.

Lehrmann's lawyer in both his aborted rape trial and this defamation action, Steve Whybrow, has spent more than a dozen days in court and countless other days in preparation and court filing.

And for that he gets ZERO - apart from his share of the $445k pre-trial settlement reached with the ABC and NewsCorp.

 

[FIGJAM]

It surprises me.

That Bruce wasn't backed by the "Liberal Illuminati"?! Says a bit about people's tendencies to conspiracy theories...

I've always thought Whybrow was ultimately responsible for the civil proceedings. Why?

1. He caused enough confusion for the criminal proceedings to be abandoned, so there may have been a high chance to do it again in a civil proceeding;
2. Higgins gave enough more than enough ammo to attack her credibility (and Lee agreed that she had low credibility as a witness, but he sorted the wheat from the chaff in that regard);
3. The AFP didn't want to press charges due to insufficient evidence to get a conviction (based on the evidence at the time which grew further after);
4. How's Bruce paying for the criminal proceedings in the first place;
5. Even if Bruce got away with the rape and is was found to be of an indeterminate nature, he wouldn't have gotten much by way of damages anyway (but his lawyers would have won considerable costs).
6. Who would advise Bruce that it was sane to "go back into the Lion's den to get his hat"?

In addition to the above, the post Civil trial dejectedness on Whybrow's face after Lee's findings were worse than Lehrmann's, who literally just got found to be a rapist (on the balance of probability).