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

 

[FIGJAM]

Great you finally agree she is a scumbag.

I could care less about her to be honest, so scumbag is too big a stretch.

It's starting to sound like she was trying to weaponise the story.

What do you think her motives were?

This was from the weekend rag and a rare opinion piece from her and she was weaponising it. The article had to do with the $2.445 million payout to Higgins.

Whilst I don’t agree with the politicisation of the article, I do agree that the payout needs looking at, particularly a component of it.

 

[Kurve]

Again, it was obviously directed at the weaponisation of the story (that was substantially false by the way!) by Higgins and Sharaz.

But Albrechtsen should have just said that rather than using that turn of phrase.

Let's not forget that the entire case was a question of rape, a rape which proved to be true.

 

[Kurve]

Most of this rubbish comes from Twitter and then gets amplified until suddenly it is fact.

I’m assuming you have got that from there given you have said you don’t read her articles.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Where did I say I don't read her articles?

 

[FIGJAM]

You asked for examples, Kurve gave you three without being at all exhaustive, and you're making excuses for her attacks on a rape victim. Why?

The first was an attack on Sharaz who clearly pulling a lot of strings behind the play. At trial, Lee queried about the influence someone can have over someone in a vulnerable state (when talking about Sharaz) aged here lamented the fact that he wasn’t called to the stand. This is clearly not an "attack on a rape victim".

The second an attack on Taniya Plibersek's use of the word 'rape' in parliament as opposed to "alleged rape" and also ScoMo’s apology in Parliament that she called “grotesque”, which is a weird word as I've discussed above. The broader context in that article was about the political weaponisation of the media by Higgins and Sharaz, which was covered by Justice Lee in his verdict.

The latter I've covered, which again, was poorly worded, but wasn't an "attack on a rape victim" and this is clear when it's read in context. If you feel that Albrechsen is attacking Higgins, she's invariably attacking the cover-up allegations that have now been proven to have been false and caused a mountain of collateral-damage.

 

[MPMonkeys]

Where did I say I don't read her articles?

"Oh ... you have a subscription to the Australian so it doesn't surprise me you didn't find anything about her coverage of the case as hateful.

The accusations against Albrechtsen's coverage of the case is documented in these threads."

Given you don't have a subscription then I'm not sure how you could have read her articles as they were always pay-walled.

 

[Kurve]

That is again not true.
The interest in this case came from the implication of a cover up. Without the political component sadly nobody could have cared less about what happened.

Rubbish.

The interest in it for you may have been in partisan protection but for most of us it was whether Higgins had been raped in Parliament House or not, the question of which was the basis of the first trial and the second defamation trial.

"Oh ... you have a subscription to the Australian so it doesn't surprise me you didn't find anything about her coverage of the case as hateful.

The accusations against Albrechtsen's coverage of the case is documented in these threads."

Given you don't have a subscription then I'm not sure how you could have read her articles as they were always pay-walled.

I asked you to point out where I said I don't read Albrechtsen's articles.

You were wrong again to state I don't read her articles when the bulk of them are in these two threads, which has been pointed out to you more than once and I've quoted from them.

If you were paying attention you would have noticed that many of us can access them with or without a subscription.

 

[Kurve]

The latter I've covered, which again, was poorly worded, but wasn't an "attack on a rape victim" and this is clear when it's read in context. If you feel that Albrechsen is attacking Higgins, she's invariably attacking the cover-up allegations that have now been proven to have been false and caused a mountain of collateral-damage.

'Poorly worded' isn't even a thing in Albrechtsen's articles.

 

[FIGJAM]

Let's not forget that the entire case was a question of rape, a rape which proved to be true.

This is what Justin Quill and Lisa Wilkinson said post-verdict and they copped the mother of all dressings down from Justice Lee at the costings hearing.

The rape itself, within the context of the broader Brittany Higgins story, a component of the whole. Important; yes! And we all feel empathy for her in this regard.

However, you can't divorce this component from the other component of the story, which is that in 2021 Higgins (and Sharaz) presented a political cover-up story to the media that was false, providing "evidence" that may have been false (both to The Project and in court under oath twice) and then in the days after the interviews, she demonstrably curated information that countered her narrative.

Justice Lee fortunately can see the bigger picture. You can remind yourself of what happened at the costings hearing in my post here.

Bruce Lehrmann revealed as man charged with two counts of rape in Toowoomba

Quality response. But to indulge you, I'm someone who posts on bigfooty from time to time. Not obsessive like some who seem to spend hours and hours preparing posts to try to convince others that the narrative they are running is right and righteous. That's who I am. Fair enough augie...

www.bigfooty.com

The desire for some here to tiptoe around the cover-up lies as some sort of insignificant issue is astounding. It is the M. Night Shyamalan twist in this saga and it's integral to the reason as to why this is one of Australia's biggest ever true crime cases.

 

[DapperDon]

It continues to amaze me that certain posters in here seem to still think BH was a labor employee who was raped by a LNP employee and it was a big politcal ploy to bring down the LNP. The fact these certain posters have never cared for the well being of a young women because she made the party look bad by being raped is just utterly disgusting and they should be ashamed.

and when I say certain posters, I mean Bruce Monkey and only Bruce Monkey

 

[Kurve]

However, you can't divorce this component from the other component of the story, which is that in 2021 Higgins (and Sharaz) presented a political cover-up story to the media that was false, providing "evidence" that may have been false (both to The Project and in court under oath twice) and then in the days after the interviews, she demonstrably curated information that countered her narrative.

Did they commit a crime?

 

[FIGJAM]

Did they commit a crime?

Making false accusations can be addressed in both criminal and civil court settings.

Either way, going to court isn't the test for what is right morally. As Lee said:

...when the accusation is examined properly, it was supposition without reasonable foundation in verifiable fact; its dissemination caused a brume of confusion, and did much collateral damage – including to the fair and orderly progress of the underlying allegation of sexual assault through the criminal justice system.

And as I pointed out yesterday, some of the victims of the dissemination of this cover-up lie, are sexual assault victims themselves.

It's some shameful s**t and you want to minimise it! Why?!

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

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...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Kurve]

Making false accusations can be addressed in both criminal and civil court settings.

Either way, going to court isn't the test for what is right morally. As Lee said:



And as I pointed out yesterday, some of the victims of the dissemination of this cover-up lie, are sexual assault victims themselves.

It's some shameful s**t and you want to minimise it! Why?!

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

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...

www.bigfooty.com

Shameful s**t? You've lost all perspective here.

What's shameful is that a young woman was raped in PH and it took a defamation case to prove it. Higgins has shown up every time and testified under oath, no charges! It was Linda Reynolds who realistically risked the perjury charges, not Higgins.

So what if as a rape victim, her perceptions might have been a bit off? Nothing new there. So what if as a former Liberal staffer who'd still be there pursuing her dreams as a media advisor, if not for the fact that she was raped, manages the release of information?

 

[MPMonkeys]

It continues to amaze me that certain posters in here seem to still think BH was a labor employee who was raped by a LNP employee and it was a big politcal ploy to bring down the LNP. The fact these certain posters have never cared for the well being of a young women because she made the party look bad by being raped is just utterly disgusting and they should be ashamed.

and when I say certain posters, I mean Bruce Monkey and only Bruce Monkey

This is just unadulterated nonsense. Stay off the breakfast cones. Its not good for your brains.

 

[MPMonkeys]

Remarkable that the political component of this case is now being wished away as not important and/or insignificant.
Makes you wonder why there is a 106 page thread on this same subject on the Australian Politics Board.

 

[MrsBlueSky]

This reminds me of Lindy Chamberlain. Nearly everyone thought as soon as the police charged her that she had murdered her baby. It took about 10 years in jail, 20 years of trying to get the original decision overturned, a marriage failure and efforts to make the dingo fess up in court to prove her innocence...and 50 years later still many people thought she was guilty.
BH has been thru hell and Bruce Lehrmann is an evil piece of work who has made her basically go mad.
Picking the eyes out of what Lee said to fit your agenda does nothing to overturn the fact that Lehrmann is a gutless little rapist and he should not be defended by anyone.

 

[Brian Oblivion]

This reminds me of Lindy Chamberlain. Nearly everyone thought as soon as the police charged her that she had murdered her baby. It took about 10 years in jail, 20 years of trying to get the original decision overturned, a marriage failure and efforts to make the dingo fess up in court to prove her innocence...and 50 years later still many people thought she was guilty.
BH has been thru hell and Bruce Lehrmann is an evil piece of work who has made her basically go mad.
Picking the eyes out of what Lee said to fit your agenda does nothing to overturn the fact that Lehrmann is a gutless little rapist and he should not be defended by anyone.

Well said.

 

[FIGJAM]

Shameful s**t? You've lost all perspective here.

Read my post. Some of the repercussions from the cover-up claims and dissemination through the media have caused damage to sexual assault victims, including one to walk away from her claim.

Indeed, the cover-up angle and media reports are the root cause of Lee's famous 'omnishambles" and claims were the main motif of the story. Their repercussions cannot be swept under the rug.

So what if as a rape victim, her perceptions might have been a bit off? Nothing new there.

A "bit off"??

If you aren't going to read the verdict yourself (and you obviously haven't) then please read this summary on Higgins in this article:

Deliberate lies and a ‘vexing’ photograph: Justice Lee’s take on the key players of the Bruce Lehrmann defamation case

A federal court justice dismissed Lehrmann’s claim – but still had critical comments for Brittany Higgins and Lisa Wilkinson in his verdict

www.theguardian.com

 

[Kurve]

And as I pointed out yesterday, some of the victims of the dissemination of this cover-up lie, are sexual assault victims themselves.

It's some shameful s**t and you want to minimise it! Why?!

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

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...

www.bigfooty.com

This is what you posted as evidence sexual assault victims were negatively impacted due to the sense of cover-up when the fact is that it had absolutely nothing to do with it.

 

[jason_recliner]

View attachment 1983496

This could be a direct reference to the hateful bile Albrechtsen spouts.

 

[FIGJAM]

Picking the eyes out of what Lee said to fit your agenda does nothing to overturn the fact that Lehrmann is a gutless little rapist and he should not be defended by anyone.

What's the "agenda" though?

We all agree that Lehrmann is a fat little grub and that the rape was abhorrent.

It's just we don't all agree that Higgins, Sharaz and The Project deserve their comeuppance for curating and or disseminating a story that had substantial untruths.

I feel like people can't straddle the divide that just because you recognise the latter, that that somehow diminishes the former. It's ******* weird!

 

[FIGJAM]

This is what you posted as evidence sexual assault victims were negatively impacted due to the sense of cover-up when the fact is that it had absolutely nothing to do with it.

You don't read anything before posting, so you?

 

[Kurve]

You don't read anything before posting, so you?

Yeh I do, clearly

 

[MPMonkeys]

This reminds me of Lindy Chamberlain. Nearly everyone thought as soon as the police charged her that she had murdered her baby. It took about 10 years in jail, 20 years of trying to get the original decision overturned, a marriage failure and efforts to make the dingo fess up in court to prove her innocence...and 50 years later still many people thought she was guilty.
BH has been thru hell and Bruce Lehrmann is an evil piece of work who has made her basically go mad.
Picking the eyes out of what Lee said to fit your agenda does nothing to overturn the fact that Lehrmann is a gutless little rapist and he should not be defended by anyone.

Nobody is defending BL and to be honest people who continue to parrot this stuff either can't read or are deliberately skewing the argument because they lack the intellectual rigour to debate the other circumstances to this case.

 

[Kurve]

Remarkable that the political component of this case is now being wished away as not important and/or insignificant.
Makes you wonder why there is a 106 page thread on this same subject on the Australian Politics Board.

That there's a 106 page thread on the Australian Politics Board might be a tip.

 

[Brian Oblivion]

Indeed, the cover-up angle and media reports are the root cause of Lee's famous 'omnishambles" and claims were the main motif of the story.

Lee's colourful description of this case as an 'omnishambles" covered far, far more than the just "cover-up angle" imo.

I know you are loving the word - so lets see what else it may refer to, shall we ?

What about the Taylor Auerbach evidence and what that revealed about the Spotlight program and the culture
at Channel 7 in securing interviews with scumbags like Lehrmann ? and the fallout from that ? Think that would fit under the 'omnishambles" heading ?

What about the Walter Sofronoff inquiry and it's Chair being referred to the ACT Integrity Commission ?
Acting Justice Stephen Kaye ruled Mr Sofronoff's contact with journalist Janet Albrechtsen of The Australian while he was leading the inquiry could lead the fair-minded observer to conclude that Mr Sofronoff "might have been influenced by the views held and publicly expressed by Ms Albrechtsen". Do you think this fits ? I know I do ?

I could go on as there is more .........