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

[FIGJAM]

Lehrmann is a compulsive liar, a cocaine addict, a narcissist, a misogynist and a rapist. Would you disagree with any of that?
Channel 7 knows this and they still gave him over $100,000.

Nope! Don't disagree with a word of it.

But just because Spotlight and Lehrmann's actions have been as dodgy as sin, doesn't mean that The Project and Higgins / Sharaz have been above reproach in their actions.

There seems to be a prevailing point of view from done in here here that the events are mutually exclusive.

 

[western royboy]

It's ultimately procedural - the request has to be made, and the respondent has a right to either comply, or refuse and mount a defence as to why.

I’m only a simple man but I find sone of this kind of stuff in the “absolute bullshit / waste of time category”

Was involved in a civil case where the Defence ran an argument that previously they had effectively admitted to. Judge took a dim view and asked them to show cause why they shouldn’t lose their practicing certificate - ultimately nothing happened but the client then sacked that lot of lawyers and hired another team of grubs drawing out the process and ratcheting up the costs

 

[Wallace52]

I’m going to ask the obvious question:

How did Taylor Auerbach make it to the witness box in this case and Sharaz didn’t?

Surely Sharaz is more of a protagonist than Auerbach could ever dream of being?


Now a less-obvious question:

Did Auerbach maybe get confused and think he was in the hot seat for $50’000.00 instead of in Court Room 22A in the Federal Court of Australia? Did Google maps somehow lead him to 184 Phillips St by accident?

 

[Wallace52]

I really wasn't trying to get you to change it, moreso curios if BF/posters can come under any scrutiny - not a bigee.

Well yeah, of course they can.

 

[Satan]

A reopened defamation lawsuit has unearthed a previously unseen draft of a memoir by Brittany Higgins, which details hedonistic scenes in the nation’s capital and alleges one politician played with the buttons on her blazer while another threw a party resembling scenes from The Wolf of Wall Street.

The former ministerial adviser describes serving drinks to a group of Liberal MPs she labelled “The Big Swinging Dicks”. The excerpts also give a fresh window into Higgins’ relationship with her fiance, David Sharaz, who she says likened her to an “animal rescued from the RSPCA”.

The age

 

[Chief]

one politician played with the buttons on her blazer

Is this a euphemism?

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

Seven’s Scandal | Media Bites | How to land Lehrmann: Seven Network rocked after former employee reveals what it took to score its Bruce Lehrmann exclusive. | By Media WatchFacebook

How to land Lehrmann: Seven Network rocked after former employee reveals what it took to score its Bruce Lehrmann exclusive.

www.facebook.com

 

[nut]

you must be a pretty sh!t person if even Sky News sacks you haha

There is still a job with Hutchy to fall back on.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Aeurbach's affidavit said there was (allegedly) a whole lot of document destruction (at Seven) of written comms between the Spotlight team and Lehrmann.

I'd believe that almost certainly occurred.

 

[Wallace52]

A reopened defamation lawsuit has unearthed a previously unseen draft of a memoir by Brittany Higgins, which details hedonistic scenes in the nation’s capital and alleges one politician played with the buttons on her blazer while another threw a party resembling scenes from The Wolf of Wall Street.

The former ministerial adviser describes serving drinks to a group of Liberal MPs she labelled “The Big Swinging Dicks”. The excerpts also give a fresh window into Higgins’ relationship with her fiance, David Sharaz, who she says likened her to an “animal rescued from the RSPCA”.

The age

Well, now. That might have just been her perspective on the relationship for a brief moment. It doesn’t mean that’s the reality of their relationship, and the dynamics between the two of them have probably evolved since that time, as relationships do.

Sharaz certainly did take on a lot of responsibility, what with Britt being so psychologically injured she’s never able to work again. I remember her mother on the witness stand in this defamation trial testifying to Brittany’s difficulty undertaking activities of daily living whilst residing in Brisbane after she quit her job.

It’s hard being a full time carer and a spouse, I would imagine. For anyone.

 

[Wallace52]

NACC investigating leaked documents as Bruce Lehrmann defamation trial reopens

The Australian Federal Police asked the national anti-corruption watchdog to investigate how a five-hour audio recording never tendered in court wound up on TV.



https://www.news.com.au/national/co...ws-story/3302018e83b6cb8e86accc4ff46816b5?amp

 

[CM86]

The Project and Higgins / Sharaz have been above reproach in their actions.

There seems to be a prevailing point of view from some in here here that the events are mutually exclusive.

Can you quote a single post, ever, on BigFooty, that does that?

And when you can't, could you explain why you need to make up or heavily 'misunderstand' posts to excuse your own posts and position?

 

[CM86]

It's circumstantial and only my opinion re. Seven having no emails that show transfers of files.

But maybe they got info via USB (from whomever!). Maybe the rest of the emails were just lining stuff up.

Did Seven have a chance to give their side of the story? Jackson? Llewellyn?

Did Auerbach show the WhattsApp chain where Taylor supposedly got the photos from Bruce? Anything will do!

Of course...

Your hate for Ten, Sharaz, Higgins and Wilkinson is all about journalist standards and media ethics.

That's why you're desperately defending 7, Spotlight and Skynews.
Because... reasons.



My position is that anyone who helps get a rape victim to share their story and not feel that they have to hide it, is good.
And anyone who actively tries to destroy a person for sharing the fact they were raped, is bad.


I don't care about your excuses. But there's a reason you and I keep ending up on opposite ends of this...

 

[FIGJAM]

Can you quote a single post, ever, on BigFooty, that does that?

I would have thought that given that you quoted a reply to Aristotle Picket, then you would have read the conversation at least:


This is an example of the prevailing point of view that just because Spotlight and Bruce Lehrmann are arseholes, that the opposite is true.

There are others (many Festerz posts for example), but I'm not going through them all.

Then there's your very next post:

My position is that anyone who helps get a rape victim to share their story and not feel that they have to hide it, is good.

So they're beyond reproach?

I also can't fathom that you can't see that there are plenty here who think that The Project and Higgins / Sharaz did nothing wrong. And by "nothing wrong", I don't mean perfection in remembering or journalism, as there logically has to be reasonable leeway for both the interviewer and interviewee.

And when you can't, could you explain why you need to make up or heavily 'misunderstand' posts to excuse your own posts and position?

I just did, so I would appreciate it if you stop inferring that I am embellishing / spinning things, just because I don't fully subscribe you your point of view on this entire issue.

 

[FIGJAM]

Your hate for Ten, Sharaz, Higgins and Wilkinson is all about journalist standards and media ethics.

I don't "hate" any of them.

Do I respect journalistic standard and ethics? Hell yeah! Huge Media Watch fan. It's a very specific type of true crime in a sense and it's amazing how many dodgy things happen the field of journalism. And in the age of fake news, it's more important than ever to get standards right.

But journalistic standards and ethics are secondary to the main issue here on the obstruction of justice side of the case, which is; what if Higgins' claims about the obstruction of justice and threat to her job for proceeding with criminal charges was simply not true?

That's why you're desperately defending 7, Spotlight and Skynews.
Because... reasons.

You won't get any argument from me about the unconscionable conduct from 7 / Spotlight and I said as much on this topic days ago.

I said this on Wednesday and reinforced my previous opinions on the disgraceful conduct of Seven / Spotlight.

I've not "defending" them just because I'm questioning the motivations of Aeurbach and his current state of mind that both bear on credit. Justice Lee made comments to that effect yesterday.

If Auerbach had just one document with a proof of source, then his credit would not be a focus, as he could go "See, here's the WhattsApp chain where Bruce dropped me these photos!". I would have been a smoking gun and taken Lehrmann's credit from zero into the far negative.

But he didn't or couldn't do that. That's a statement of fact rather than "defending 7, Spotlight".
Not sure what Skynews has to do with anything by the way, as I've never watched or quoted them. I am happy to hear news from any source and filter it, but I mostly get my news from the ABC.

My position is that anyone who helps get a rape victim to share their story and not feel that they have to hide it, is good.

I don't disagree generally, but there has to be a timing caveat attached to this.

Let me use an extreme example and I'll assume that you live in Melbourne:

Say someone was assaulted at Southern Cross Station and if they could under their their own steam walk out of the complex, is it reasonable for them to choose to turn right and go The Age and 3AW building to share their story? Or should they turn left and go to the Police Headquarters?
For me it's a no brainer, because if you go to The Age building, their reception will likely go "Why the hell did you come here?! Any story can wait, so let's call in an ambulance and the police!".

Relative to the case in had, what if Higgins' narrative to Maiden and Wilkinson was that she was raped in Parliament House and that whilst the support form her colleagues wasn't perfect, they did everything by the book. That she went to police, but withdrew the charges 5 days after lodging them, as she was too busy.

There is still a story there worth telling, in the fullness of time. But it probably wouldn't have been at that exact point, especially without any formal allegations with the police.

Now, I am and have been in full agreement that if there was indeed a conspiracy to cover up and there were threats to Higgins' job if she pursued the case, then that would indeed be a story worth telling through the media.

So if it's true, then play on!

If it's not true however, then it's caused a world of carnage without there even being a live criminal charge. Ultimately, should a new investigation without the News/Project articles have gone so far as to get the allegations to the courts, then there would have been carnage anyway, as Higgins would have one day got to tell her story. And I agree wholeheartedly that it's good that they "share their story and not feel that they have to hide it".

I don't care about your excuses. But there's a reason you and I keep ending up on opposite ends of this...

We're not at "opposite ends" at all!

I've said for almost a year now that on the balance of probability that Lehrmann is a rapist and is a slimy campaigner generally. How's that opposite to you?

I feel that the main sticking point is as noted above, which is the timing and nature of Higgins' media interview.

I feel that you take umbrage with that if someone holds her story to account that it is an offshoot of 'victim blaming' and probably worse than that, if someone claims that there was no 'obstruction of justice', that they are effectively inferring that Higgins is a liar. Neither of these are necessarily true, as on the latter in particular, nobody can understand her trauma and the ruminations upon ruminations on every minute detail over time. Anyone will have recollection issues and it's human nature to end up with a biased point of view towards oneself, especially over an almost 2 year period.

At which point, it was critically important for 10, Wilkinson and Maiden to approach this matter with an open minded scepticism, in that Higgins' story might well have been incorrect, at least in whole or in part. And based upon the evidence that I've seen in this trial and as hinted by Justice Lee referring to the MEAA Journalistic Code of Conduct relative to The Project team, it appears that Justice Lee will have some things to say about the integrity of their conduct.

 

[Festerz]

I'd believe that almost certainly occurred.

Yep. This is what happens when The Fourth Estate - who the public rely on to tell us what is happening in the world, what is real and what is not, and to keep politicians and other people with power to account - become a part of the political story they are meant to report on. When they insert themselves as an advocate and player in the game.

Network Seven freely admit that someone leaked to them highly confidential personal information that was extracted from an (alleged) rape victim's phone by the Australian Federal Police.

The Australian's Janet Albrechtsen and Murdoch and Daily Mail tabloids make the same admission in relation to other personal data from Ms Higgins from the same source that was published during the Sofronoff Inquiry. The Australian's Janet Albrechtsen was effectively collaborating with the independent Kings Council who was meant to be conducting an independent inquiry into the Lehrmann Rape Trial.

Almost all of these people are not members of the MEAA or even journalists but are happy to hide behind a single clause of the journalists' code of ethics quoted previously in this thread and not revealing the source of this illegally leaked material. While at the same time ignoring every other aspects of the Code of Ethics relating to transparency, honesty and the independent search for truth.

I believe that sooner or later a proper journalist with an ethical backbone working inside Kerry Stokes' Seven West Media is going to realise the long term damage that has and is being done by their employer to journalism in this country. And the harm it is doing to victims of rape and domestic violence, especially amongst women, from daring to come forward to tell their stories of the crimes committed against them. To do that will take great courage - they've seen the lengths the powerful media moguls and their political allies have personally attacked those who dare to come forward. And the cretins on social media expecting to see them being 'ripped new assholes' .

So the pressure and support to make that happen has to come from other journalists - for the benefit of all of us.

And I think that is already happening:

 

[Phar Ted]

Well, the time is nigh - will Lehrmann win his case against 10 and wilkinson?

 

[BFew]

The Australian's Janet Albrechtsen was effectively collaborating with the independent Kings Council who was meant to be conducting an independent inquiry into the Lehrmann Rape Trial.

And possibly meeting with and/or communicating with Lehrmann too, according to the txt messages between Auerbach and Jackson screenshots evidence uploaded to the Federal Court Lehrmann portal yesterday.

 

[BFew]

According to the Auerbach text messages between Auerbach and Jackson screenshots evidence uploaded to the Federal Court Lehrmann portal yesterday, a very very senior exec at Seven was (named rightly or wrongly, according to Auerbach), a fan of Lehrmann's. (Not a Stokes).

 

[Chief]

This whole C7 weirdness of building up a personality profile for their pet weirdos. Stokes is rich enough from non-C7 stuff. He doesn't need to do this stuff.

 

[Festerz]

Well, the time is nigh - will Lehrmann win his case against 10 and wilkinson?

My belief is that Lehrmann will almost certainly win his claim that The Project program (publication) defamed Mr Lehrmann. That he was readily identifiable in the story and that the high bar to demonstrably prove that in the balance of probabilities Lehrmann did indeed rape Ms Higgins as outlined in the story (i.e. the truth defence) was not reached, due in part to the lack of credibility of the key witnesses.

What matters to me is not that almost foregone conclusion, but the manner in which the judgement is couched by Justice Lee and what aggravated damages he settles on in delivering his judgement, based on his assessment of the reputational damage done to Bruce Lehrmann.

I hope we hear the 'lowest coin of the realm' in his court room again.

 

[Festerz]

This whole C7 weirdness of building up a personality profile for their pet weirdos. Stokes is rich enough from non-C7 stuff. He doesn't need to do this stuff.

But recent events show he clearly does 'need to do this stuff'.

Perhaps that is because of his immense wealth and political power, and not in spite of it.

A symptom?

 

[BFew]

But recent events show he clearly does 'need to do this stuff'.

Perhaps that is because of his immense wealth and political power, and not in spite of it.

A symptom?

The value in their media organisations is not cash or profits.
It's the power and influence opportunities.
And what this power and influence can do to assist their other organisations (current and future), allies and personal/family dynasties.

 

[Festerz]

The value in their media organisations is not cash or profits.
It's the power and influence opportunities.
And what this power and influence can do to assist their other organisations (current and future), allies and personal/family dynasties.

I agree these are often the drivers on a personal level for many men, and women, with considerable wealth and power.

But Seven West Media is a part of Seven Group Holdings, a public listed diversified company with shareholders expecting a return on their investment. And while Stokes and his cronies might hold a significant proportion of those shares they cannot be completely immune to how the negative perception of the media arm of his empire impacts negatively on the long term value of their company and its ability to attract talented employees and investment from a wide variety of sources.

 

[BFew]

its ability to attract talented employees

Would have taken a huge hit this week.

Which is why I think at least Llewelyn won't be working there much longer, or at least nothing more than gardening leave.