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

[FIGJAM]

Have a read back of what you’ve put here - think you’ve stretched it a bit far

On the probable hung jury front?

They deliberated for 4.5 business days starting 19 October. That would be a frustrating amount of back and fourth.

Went to the judge stating that they were deadlocked on the afternoon of Tuesday 23 October.

Then they hit the 6th day and presumably that was the day that external info was discovered, with the trial aborted on the morning 27 October.

Jury in Bruce Lehrmann's trial sent back to deliberate after saying it was unable to reach verdict

Jurors in the trial of accused rapist Bruce Lehrmann are told to reconsider the evidence after they told the ACT Supreme Court they had failed to reach a verdict.

www.abc.net.au

A timeline of how the Bruce Lehrmann defamation case unfolded

Here’s what has happened so far in the former Liberal staffer’s case against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson

www.theguardian.com

I don't think I'm stretching too far to suggest that there was a high chance of a mistrial, even without the external information.

 

[Festerz]

The claim that 'there was a high chance of a mistrial' in the Lehrmann rape trial is yet more uninformed guesswork to suit a narrative from someone who loves to selectively quote Justice Lee when it suits but seems to ignore the opinion of the trial judge in the Lehrmann case who stated on the morning that the jury was discharged for juror misconduct:

"I have the power to discharge you without a verdict, but only if I am satisfied there is no likelihood of agreement,"

Evidence of group dynamics and research papers on jury decision making show that, even when a unanimous verdict is required, it is time which is the factor that enables them to reach a verdict.

Chief justice Lucy McCallum highlighted this in her directions to the jury when they returned several times:

“Judges are usually reluctant to discharge a jury because experience shows juries can in fact agree if given more time to consider the issues and evidence,”

She said their reasons for reaching the same verdict can differ and that it only matters that they all agree unanimously.

For all we know the jury could have been one vote away from a verdict of guilty - both the defence and the prosecution barristers certainly thought so.

We will never know.

A retrial was set for February 2023 before prosecutors dropped the rape charges against Bruce Lehrmann saying a retrial would pose an “unnacceptable risk” to her health.

The real issue in rape charges rarely proceeding to a guilty verdict is the barriers set under the Evidence Act and the requirement to reach a verdict that a sexual assault without 'consent' occurred 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

 

[Number37]

How is effectively bringing up a topic for discussion "simplistic nonsense".

You need to stop responding to me now.

It's simplistic nonsense because you just made a blanket statement "inquisitorial system would benefit victims", you didn't even say why or how.

 

[Number37]

Higgins' claims and evidence provided within The Project article, false or otherwise, were literally extensively used in the criminal trial.

False information has zero probative value.
It can't be used for anything.

But you are just again trying to muddy the waters.
Higgins' testimony about the rape is almost entirely consistent with everything she has said.


Which part exactly of her testimony in the criminal trial was false information?

 

[Number37]

On inquisitorial vs adversarial I found this phd paper

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/9257247.pdf

Now it is a long read so yes I skipped to the conclusion which was that the issues re how rape victims are treated is more around the cultural beliefs about rape (and defence lawyers in both adversarial and inquisitorial systems did the same things re the victim’s sexual history, behaviour and the concept of the “perfect victim”) the paper did say both systems were slowly moving away from that culture (obviously a positive)

The only difference between the 2 is that the judge plays a far more active role in inquisitorial systems.
There is still defence and prosecution. There is still cross examination. There is still all of the things that make a trial an ordeal for victims.

A blanket statement that an inquisitorial system benefits victims of rape is difficult to reconcile.
So much is done these days to protect the victim, the system has come a long way.

 

[Gough]

Two of the three media big companies in Australia rewarded and defended to the hilt a man that a judge found on balanced raped Brittany Higgins and yet the majority of fingers seem to be pointed at social media when it comes to male violence against women in this country. Andrew Tate is a problem but the mainstream media and politicians are giving themselves massive free passes here.

 

[Festerz]

Also important to note the quality and amount of evidence presented by Ten in their truth defence of the Lehrmann defamation action that was absent from the prosecution case in Lehrmann's criminal trial.

In particular the CCTV footage and witness corroboration (including a forensic toxicologist) proving that Ms Higgins was highly intoxicated and that Lehrmann had played an active part in encouraging that alcohol consumption. Justice Lee highlighted this is as a key factor in his findings around consent leading to his finding that Lehrmann did indeed rape Ms Higgins.

Would the jury in the rape Lehrmann's rape trial have reached a similar conclusion (clearing the bar of reasonable doubt) had they been presented with that body of condemning evidence?

The head of the ACT Police rape and child abuse unit told the Sofronoff Inquiry that his team was used as a 'training ground' for young detectives and there was confusion amongst officers of evidence and charging requirements for allegations of sexual assault.

So maybe what is needed is a thorough review of the resourcing and professionalism of the rape investigation units of state and territory police departments rather than a leap to the populist and long term nirvana of inquisitorial criminal justice systems.

 

[Saint]

Two of the three media big companies in Australia rewarded and defended to the hilt a man that a judge found on balanced raped Brittany Higgins and yet the majority of fingers seem to be pointed at social media when it comes to male violence against women in this country. Andrew Tate is a problem but the mainstream media and politicians are giving themselves massive free passes here.

You mean plying an accused rapist with drugs and women and hotel rooms in return for running a positive story about them isn't responsible journalism?!?!

Before the recent judgement, Bruce Lehrman raped a woman, got glowing reviews from that employee, then when they were charged with rape, they were rewarded by a news company with largesse.

Meanwhile, Higgins was raped at her workplace, got torn through the media for it, ended up in hospital, got a payout that her then-boss thinks might be corrupt and is taking her to court to take it off her because her partner tweeted something slightly nasty about her.

And people wonder how gendered violence is perpetuated in our society?

 

[Saint]

Also important to note the quality and amount of evidence presented by Ten in their truth defence of the Lehrmann defamation action that was absent from the prosecution case in Lehrmann's criminal trial.

In particular the CCTV footage and witness corroboration (including a forensic toxicologist) proving that Ms Higgins was highly intoxicated and that Lehrmann had played an active part in encouraging that alcohol consumption. Justice Lee highlighted this is as a key factor in his findings around consent leading to his finding that Lehrmann did indeed rape Ms Higgins.

Would the jury in the rape Lehrmann's rape trial have reached a similar conclusion (clearing the bar of reasonable doubt) had they been presented with that body of condemning evidence?

The head of the ACT Police rape and child abuse unit told the Sofronoff Inquiry that his team was used as a 'training ground' for young detectives and there was confusion amongst officers of evidence and charging requirements for allegations of sexual assault.

So maybe what is needed is a thorough review of the resourcing and professionalism of the rape investigation units of state and territory police departments rather than a leap to the populist and long term nirvana of inquisitorial criminal justice systems.

I wonder if the police do that because they're so often not expected to get an outcome, so doesn't matter if the rookie gets it wrong. While things like homicide they're expected to get an outcome so have their best police on it.

Which is a pretty ordinary way of looking at things, I would think.

 

[The Punter]

I wonder if the police do that because they're so often not expected to get an outcome, so doesn't matter if the rookie gets it wrong. While things like homicide they're expected to get an outcome so have their best police on it.

Which is a pretty ordinary way of looking at things, I would think.

I would imagine there is a very high level of turnover in law enforcement sexual crime units. That might be a more benign explanation (using young recruits before they get burned out).

 

[FIGJAM]

False information has zero probative value.
It can't be used for anything.

Which part exactly of her testimony in the criminal trial was false information?

It wasn't "false information" at the time, they were just untested claims that had been broadcast to millions of Australians.

These The Project claims were then tested in court. Some of the the claims include the that her job was under threat if she went to the police (this is what Lee refers to the cover up narrative), which were heavily tested in the criminal trial. The origin and cause of the bruise photo was under intense investigation in the criminal trial. And there are more.

Higgins' testimony about the rape is almost entirely consistent with everything she has said.

Yep!

You really need to read the recent verdict in full, particularly as to the difference credibility of Higgins in 2019 and then 2021. She can be both telling the truth regarding the rape with a flawed, but relatively high degree of reliability on the one hand, and have "crafted a narrative accusing others of putting up roadblocks and forcing her two years earlier of having to choose between her career and seeking justice by making and pursuing a complaint" on the other.

I'm not "muddying waters" here. It's an unbelievably complicated set of events!

 

[Not Important]

It wasn't "false information" at the time, they were just untested claims that had been broadcast to millions of Australians.

These The Project claims were then tested in court. Some of the the claims include the that her job was under threat if she went to the police (this is what Lee refers to the cover up narrative), which were heavily tested in the criminal trial. The origin and cause of the bruise photo was under intense investigation in the criminal trial. And there are more.



Yep!

You really need to read the recent verdict in full, particularly as to the difference credibility of Higgins in 2019 and then 2021. She can be both telling the truth regarding the rape with a flawed, but relatively high degree of reliability on the one hand, and have "crafted a narrative accusing others of putting up roadblocks and forcing her two years earlier of having to choose between her career and seeking justice by making and pursuing a complaint" on the other.

I'm not "muddying waters" here. It's an unbelievably complicated set of events!

well, you and your fellow protectors like to complicate the issues. on he one hand this. then on the other hand that.

oh, and what a pity the legal system prevents matters related to lerhmann’s history with women being considered during trials - apart from sentencing when it's often too late.. and there’s still a lot to play out in the lerhmann history.

 

[FIGJAM]

well, you and your fellow protectors like to complicate the issues. on he one hand this. then on the other hand that.

Read the recent verdict bud! There's a lot going on!!

And if reading the verdict is too much for you, then just have a look at a very, very brief summary of Lee's general findings in here:

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

 

[Festerz]

Speaking of the AFP Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Team, officers from that unit have jumped on the Lehrmann saga defamation money train...



As with the Linda Reynolds defamation action against them, the ACT Govt. will settle long before this gets to trial.

The AFP SACAT know this.

Money for old rope.

 

[FIGJAM]

So we've got Justin Quill spouting 'vindication' to every media outlet under the sun prompting Lee to ask for transcripts;

Reynolds unwisely continuing the defamation case;

And now the AFP squeezing the balls of the ACT for money based on comments from Drumgold.

All within 2 weeks of the verdict.

Safe to say the omnishambles hasn't shown any sign of abating!

 

[Festerz]

I wonder if the police do that because they're so often not expected to get an outcome, so doesn't matter if the rookie gets it wrong. While things like homicide they're expected to get an outcome so have their best police on it.

Which is a pretty ordinary way of looking at things, I would think.

IMHO the issue is that police investigators are heavily reliant on the use of physical evidence and eye witnesses in the laying and pursuit of criminal charges.

There is very often none of those things when they step in to investigate a sexual assault report.

That fact is made even worse when those investigating the sexual assault are poorly trained and inexperienced in sexual assault reports, have limited life experience, are in a male dominated team and view it as just a step towards securing a position in a ‘proper’ police investigative career.

This is exactly the combination that the head of the ACT Sexual Assault Unit described as existing at the time Brittany Higgins first reported her rape in 2019 and subsequently.

 

[Wallace52]

It does raise a possible approach for those who have been raped is to go nuts doxxing the rapist then defend via defamation as “truth” defence rather than put up with court process

Doxing is now a crime, isn’t it?

Thanks Google/ Doxing is the action or process of searching for and publishing private or identifying information about a particular individual on the internet, typically with malicious intent.

I don’t think the project named B. L., did they?

Also, the latest alleged rape victim about which this thread is entitled has not gone to the media and has gone to the police. Which I think is probably a good move.

At the end of the day, and I’m not suggesting this is Bruce - but if there’s someone going around raping women, at some point, they will need to be stopped for community safety.

IMO.

 

[Festerz]

It does raise a possible approach for those who have been raped is to go nuts doxxing the rapist then defend via defamation as “truth” defence rather than put up with court process

No it doesn't.

 

[western royboy]

Doxing is now a crime, isn’t it?

Thanks Google/ Doxing is the action or process of searching for and publishing private or identifying information about a particular individual on the internet, typically with malicious intent.

I don’t think the project named B. L., did they?

Also, the latest alleged rape victim about which this thread is entitled has not gone to the media and has gone to the police. Which I think is probably a good move.

At the end of the day, and I’m not suggesting this is Bruce - but if there’s someone going around raping women, at some point, they will need to be stopped for community safety.

IMO.

In contested cases, the conviction rate for Rape is very, very low. It’s lower again for Smyth where evidence is nit taken immediately after the event. Once appeals are taken into account it’s like 1 in 100.

Given the trauma involved in going thru this process I can understand why you might want to involve the media to put some disinfectant on the situation. Not saying it’s the right way but I can understand to some extent why you might be tempted to think that way.

At least you get to take a bit revenge. To be fair I doubt many of you can truly understand how brutal the process is.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Doxing is now a crime, isn’t it?

Thanks Google/ Doxing is the action or process of searching for and publishing private or identifying information about a particular individual on the internet, typically with malicious intent.

I don’t think the project named B. L., did they?

Also, the latest alleged rape victim about which this thread is entitled has not gone to the media and has gone to the police. Which I think is probably a good move.

At the end of the day, and I’m not suggesting this is Bruce - but if there’s someone going around raping women, at some point, they will need to be stopped for community safety.

IMO.

Was meaning if a victim Is disheartened by the statistics and difficulty of proving her case in court, to simply put her story out there and dare the perpetrators to shut them down via defamation cases.
We know that social media moderation is close to non existent
I use the term doxxing to state “this is what person x did to me” so absolutely there is malice intended but it also comes from a lack of faith in the justice system.

I’m theorising that this could be a future approach; I was not saying this was what Brittany had done apologies if it came out that way

 

[Not Important]

Read the recent verdict bud! There's a lot going on!!

And if reading the verdict is too much for you, then just have a look at a very, very brief summary of Lee's general findings in here:

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

thanks, champ, but it has s.f.a to do with the substantive point i was making.

 

[Not Important]

Michael Bradley

 

[Wallace52]

Was meaning if a victim Is disheartened by the statistics and difficulty of proving her case in court, to simply put her story out there and dare the perpetrators to shut them down via defamation cases.
We know that social media moderation is close to non existent
I use the term doxxing to state “this is what person x did to me” so absolutely there is malice intended but it also comes from a lack of faith in the justice system.

I’m theorising that this could be a future approach; I was not saying this was what Brittany had done apologies if it came out that way

No it’s fine, I got it.

The system is completely broken for victim survivors.

There is a lack of faith in the justice system. Something has to change.

 

[MrsBlueSky]

So what's the problem here with Drumgold. He wrote something he believed was correct, then he withdrew those comments. As far as I can see he didn't name the policemen he was whinging about.
What is it with these cops. there was going to be a mistrial one way or the other and Brittany had to wait until her rapist took Ch10 to court for defamation to get the verdict she was after by the incompetence of the police who are now suing the gov't. Surely it has to be called a sh.t show at best.If it wasn't for another few court cases that will come out of the rape, if I was Brittany I would get further away than living in France from those disgusting people she used to work with in Canberra.

 

[Festerz]

So what's the problem here with Drumgold. He wrote something he believed was correct, then he withdrew those comments. As far as I can see he didn't name the policemen he was whinging about.
What is it with these cops. there was going to be a mistrial one way or the other and Brittany had to wait until her rapist took Ch10 to court for defamation to get the verdict she was after by the incompetence of the police who are now suing the gov't. Surely it has to be called a sh.t show at best.If it wasn't for another few court cases that will come out of the rape, if I was Brittany I would get further away than living in France from those disgusting people she used to work with in Canberra.

IMHO being subject to harsh scrutiny is an unwelcome but accepted part of being a public official/public servant. And that includes elected officials and serving police officers.

I'm 100% certain that correspondence complaining about the the actions of individual officers and sections of a police force are received by Commissioners of Police in every jurisdiction of Australia on a daily basis. Most of them from disgruntled members of the public but the odd complaint from Ministers or other senior officials, lawyers etc. Many of the complaints and allegations subsequently being found to be baseless or misleading and ignored or corrected but none of them resulting in formal defamation action.

The same can be said for emails, letters and social media postings relating to government Ministers.

And yet here we have a government Minister and now a section of the ACT police force taking costly high profile legal action against individuals involved in the Lehrmann rape trial.

Seems to me that this is politics at play at its most base and destructive level, with public officials using the courts to settle scores.

It's a bloody disgrace. Shame on them all.