Historical rape allegation against the Attorney-General Christian Porter

[jason_recliner]

You comfortable with 'he most likely did it' ?

No. I'm not comfortable with the fact that our AG is most likely a rapist (and a misogynist, and an adulterer). I think the right thing for him to do, as our servant, is to step down in recognition that a significant proportion of Australians no longer have faith in his character and judgement. Good character and sound judgement are, to me, prerequisite for the role of AG. How, especially, can he be trusted to apply Australian law to women?

 

[jason_recliner]

IMO, for the long term rebuilding of the WA State Liberal Party, Porter will need to sever his ties with both the WA State and Federal Liberal Parties.

Yes, I wonder if the result was at least in part a protest against Porter and Morrison. Liberal was never going to win, but to drop from 13 seats to two? I hadn't voted in federal or state elections for about a decade, but I voted on Saturday for Labor and put Liberal last (the last few times I voted, it had been for Liberal).

 

[Kwality]

The Age reports:

Christian Porter launches defamation action against the ABC
By Michaela Whitbourn


Attorney-General Christian Porter has launched Federal Court defamation proceedings against the ABC over an online article that he alleges portrays him as the perpetrator of a “brutal” rape that contributed to a woman taking her own life. The lawsuit is expected to put an end to calls for a public inquiry into his fitness to remain in office because a trial would ventilate many of the same issues before a judge, and involve the same witnesses.

In a statement of claim lodged on Monday, lawyers for Mr Porter, who is on medical leave, seek damages, including aggravated damages, for a February 26 article published on the ABC’s website, headlined “Scott Morrison, senators and AFP told of historical rape allegation against Cabinet Minister”.
ABC journalist Louise Milligan, who broke the story, is also named as a party to the lawsuit.

Mr Porter, who is not named in the ABC article, has retained a trio of high-powered lawyers, including Sydney barristers Bret Walker, SC, and Sue Chrysanthou, SC, and solicitor Rebekah Giles.

“Over the last few weeks, the Attorney-General has been subjected to trial by media without regard to the presumption of innocence or the rules of evidence and without any proper disclosure of the material said to support the untrue allegations,” Ms Giles said in a statement on Monday.
“The trial by media should now end with the commencement of these proceedings.”

Ms Giles said “the claims made by the ABC and Ms Milligan will be determined in a court in a procedurally fair process”. She foreshadowed that Mr Porter would give evidence in the proceedings.

Ms Chrysanthou and Ms Giles have acted successfully for a series of high-profile defamation plaintiffs, many of them women, including Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young against former Liberal Democratic Party senator David Leyonhjelm.

The statement of claim alleges the ABC article conveys a series of false and defamatory claims about Mr Porter, including that he “brutally raped a 16-year-old girl in 1988”, when he was 17, and that this contributed to her taking her own life.

They say the article also conveys that Mr Porter was “reasonably suspected by police” of rape, warranting criminal charges being brought against him, and there were “reasonable grounds for suspecting” both that he committed the crime and that it “contributed to [the woman] taking her own life”.

Mr Porter has strenuously denied allegations made by a woman that he raped her during a debating tournament in Sydney in 1988. The woman took her own life last year, after telling NSW Police that she did not wish to pursue her complaint.

Mr Porter’s lawyers say the Attorney-General was readily identifiable as the unnamed cabinet minister in the ABC’s online story, and his name was “trending prominently on Twitter” after it was published. He was “obliged” to identify himself on March 3, they say.

The statement of claim says factors that supported the identification of Mr Porter as the subject of the report included a Four Corners broadcast in November last year that presented Mr Porter as “a sexist and misogynist”.

The lawyers also say that only six male members of cabinet were about the same age as the woman in 1988 and, of those, only Mr Porter and two others were senior cabinet ministers. A photo caption in the article said the allegation involved a senior minister. On the day the article was published, visits to Mr Porter’s Facebook page and website “increased significantly”, the statement of claim says. Mr Porter’s lawyers argue the ABC and Milligan should pay aggravated damages, which are awarded in cases where a party’s conduct is considered “improper, unjustifiable or lacking in bona fides”, because they knew Mr Porter was readily identifiable as the subject of the article and “would ultimately be compelled to publicly respond”.

They say the ABC and Milligan also knew the allegations “could never be proved in any criminal or civil proceeding” but proceeded anyway “to ensure that he was publicly condemned and disgraced in the absence of any finding against him”.

Ms Giles, principal director of law firm Company (Giles), said that “if the ABC and Ms Milligan wish to argue the truth of the allegations, they can do so in these proceedings”. The ABC will file a defence to the proceedings at a later date. It is not yet known if the broadcaster will seek to rely on the defence of truth, which would effectively result in a rape trial being held in the context of a civil case.

In defamation cases, the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities, rather than the higher criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt, but it is still a high bar when the allegations are serious.

As is common in many cases involving media outlets, it is likely the ABC will argue the article does not convey the very serious imputations of guilt or suspicion alleged by Mr Porter, but that it reported he was the subject of an allegation.

The judge is the final arbiter of what a publication says.

In recent days, two-thirds of Mr Porter’s legal team - Ms Chrysanthou and Ms Giles - acted for former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins, who has alleged she was raped by a former staffer in the office of Defence Minister Linda Reynolds.

Senator Reynolds apologised unreservedly to Ms Higgins last week and agreed to pay damages after being caught out telling staff Ms Higgins was a “lying cow”. Senator Reynolds, who is on medical leave, has maintained she did not make the comment about the rape allegation but Ms Higgins’ account of her handling of the complaint.

Ms Chrysanthou also acted for actor Geoffrey Rush in his successful defamation suit against The Daily Telegraph, which resulted in a record $2.9 million payout.

Ms Milligan will be questioned vigorously & based on her efforts in the Pell case will need an equally vigorous (high powered) advocate. I'd expect her earlier story on 4 corners will get a going over, as will how long the investigation took.

 

[Kwality]

No. I'm not comfortable with the fact that our AG is most likely a rapist (and a misogynist, and an adulterer). I think the right thing for him to do, as our servant, is to step down in recognition that a significant proportion of Australians no longer have faith in his character and judgement. Good character and sound judgement are, to me, prerequisite for the role of AG. How, especially, can he be trusted to apply Australian law to women?

I agree the right thing would have been to step down, with the only rider being those who will, for purely political advantage claim it is proof of his guilt.
Following so closely on the ABC story from late last year, that response would be a certainty.
The AG needs to be above reproach.

Are you comfortable with 'he most likely did it' ? Appears so.

 

[GreyCrow]

I was looking at Craig Kelly as the unnamed Minister as he has suddenly resigned just before

It was only through here and recognizing the present tense was used that I found out it was Porter

Now maybe that's more me than the clues given

 

[Kwality]

Attorney-General Christian Porter launches defamation action against ABC - ABC News

Next.
Female Labor staffers detail allegations of aggressive behaviour and sexual harassment (msn.com)

 

[BFew]

Tonight's 3 and a half Corners could be interesting

Psst. What's brewing at Four Corners? | TV Tonight

ABC is very tight-lipped on tonight's episode of Four Corners.

tvtonight.com.au

 

[jason_recliner]

Are you comfortable with 'he most likely did it' ? Appears so.

I'd be more comfortable with cctv and audio recordings of the event. In the absence of hard evidence (as is unfortunately common with such cases), I don't know if I'm "comfortable" with "he most likely did it". But I just don't see it as very likely that the rape allegation is false. And I'm less comfortable with an AG that is probably a rapist (amongst his other failings with regard to women). So I guess it comes down to that balance of probabilities, except it is a 'balance of comfortabilities'. It would be awful and unfair if he lost his job and is forever known as a likely rapist if he's innocent. If he's guilty, he's not going to spend one day behind bars, even though his crime was absolutely heinous and at the upper end of seriousness for what is one of the most serious crimes. It's an awful situation all round, and I don't think any outcome will be satisfactory or fair for any parties involved.

 

[BFew]

Yes, I wonder if the result was at least in part a protest against Porter and Morrison.

and Reynolds (WA Federal Senator), and the disgraced ex WA State Treasurer Troy Buswell.

From chair-sniffing to strip clubs: A decade of WA political scandals exposed

Chair-sniffing, bra-snapping and a post-wedding car crash were among the misdemeanours committed by WA politicians this decade — and they were by just one MP. Jacob Kagi sifts through the wreckage to recount some of the biggest stories in WA politics since 2009.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Kurve]

Australia Politics live:

11m ago13:36

The agreement to not hold any divisions ended at 1.30pm.
Question time begins in just under 30 minutes.
Any questions on Christian Porter will most likely remain unanswered, given he has now started defamation proceedings. On March4Justice day.

 

[utility]

The agreement to not hold any divisions ended at 1.30pm.
Question time begins in just under 30 minutes.
Any questions on Christian Porter will most likely remain unanswered, given he has now started defamation proceedings. On March4Justice day.

The timing is somehow unsurprising. /sarcasm

A-G lawyers funded by taxpayers. ABC lawyers funded by taxpayers. How nice.

 

[BFew]

Seeking vindication, Christian Porter sues ABC for defamation

Porter has resisted an investigation into historical rape claims levelled against him. Ironically, a high-profile defamation trial would achieve many of the same aims.

www.crikey.com.au

'That Porter is turning to defamation law ....
what could be one of the biggest trials in Australian legal history. If Porter’s case ends up in court, Australia’s plaintiff-friendly defamation law gives him a very good chance at winning.

If the ABC apologises and retracts before it gets there, then the attorney-general gets a pyrrhic victory, and media companies become even more reluctant to touch such allegations again.'

From what we know of Porter, the 'rule of law' strategy, and defending himself, defamation action against the ABC was a natural next step.

Can the Federal Government Minister(s) responsible for the ABC, issue formal and allowable directives to the ABC Board on legal action, like that involving Porter?

Like direct them to retract and apologise and not to defend the defamation case against them?

 

[Kurve]

Can the Federal Government Minister(s) responsible for the ABC, issue formal and allowable directives to the ABC Board on legal action, like that involving Porter?

Like direct them to retract and apologise and not to defend the defamation case against them?

I hope that's not what we're going to see play out tonight on 4 Corners

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Ms Milligan will be questioned vigorously & based on her efforts in the Pell case will need an equally vigorous (high powered) advocate. I'd expect her earlier story on 4 corners will get a going over, as will how long the investigation took.

Hopefully this goes ahead & we get all the details that would otherwise have been brought to an independent enquiry.

Even if Porter wins this case, I suspect his reputation will be damaged further beyond repair.

 

[Kurve]

11m ago14:08

Paul Karp
While Christian Porter is entitled to bring a defamation suit against the ABC, it may necessitate a little reshuffle of responsibilities in the attorney general’s portfolio to avoid any potential conflict of interest.

Porter is responsible for defamation law reform. Stage 1 of the process has resulted in a list of changes states and territories must make to their own laws (ironically, to make the law a little less plaintiff-friendly). There is also “a second stage reform process focusing on the responsibilities and liability of digital platforms for defamatory content published online”.

It seems...not the sort of thing you want a current defamation litigant to be in charge of.

 

[BFew]

11m ago14:08

Paul Karp
While Christian Porter is entitled to bring a defamation suit against the ABC, it may necessitate a little reshuffle of responsibilities in the attorney general’s portfolio to avoid any potential conflict of interest.

Porter is responsible for defamation law reform. Stage 1 of the process has resulted in a list of changes states and territories must make to their own laws (ironically, to make the law a little less plaintiff-friendly). There is also “a second stage reform process focusing on the responsibilities and liability of digital platforms for defamatory content published online”.

It seems...not the sort of thing you want a current defamation litigant to be in charge of.

Karp has updated that Guardian post

Labor presses Coalition on independent inquiry – as it happened

Prime minister grilled in parliament; Queensland calls on Canberra to consider Covid vaccine rollout in PNG. This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

'I’ve asked Scott Morrison’s office how that will be managed.

The assistant minister to the attorney general, Amanda Stoker, told Guardian Australia the government was “in the process” of determining how to manage “any potential conflict of interest”.'

 

[Kurve]

Here's Porter's Federal Court statement of claim, makes for interesting reading. If anybody here retweeted anything to do with this, it was counted.

https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/83594/Statement-of-Claim-1532021.pdf

 

[utility]

Here's Porter's Federal Court statement of claim, makes for interesting reading. If anybody here retweeted anything to do with this, it was counted.

https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/83594/Statement-of-Claim-1532021.pdf

The word "allege" or a derivative is mentioned in 12 of the first 18 paragraphs. And he wasn't named. So how is it defamation? That's why I'm not a defo lawyer... and curious about the motivations of the court filing.

 

[Kwality]

Hopefully this goes ahead & we get all the details that would otherwise have been brought to an independent enquiry.

Even if Porter wins this case, I suspect his reputation will be damaged further beyond repair.

Agree with the comment over Porters reputation given he can no more prove himself guilty than a Court could find him guilty.

The advantage of a Court is its wise to tell the truth & the legal eagles wont allow spin, unless the judge approves it.

 

[BFew]

If anybody here retweeted anything to do with this, it was counted.

Including posting copies of relevant Milligan tweets on Bigfooty?

 

[Kwality]

I'd be more comfortable with cctv and audio recordings of the event. In the absence of hard evidence (as is unfortunately common with such cases), I don't know if I'm "comfortable" with "he most likely did it". But I just don't see it as very likely that the rape allegation is false. And I'm less comfortable with an AG that is probably a rapist (amongst his other failings with regard to women). So I guess it comes down to that balance of probabilities, except it is a 'balance of comfortabilities'. It would be awful and unfair if he lost his job and is forever known as a likely rapist if he's innocent. If he's guilty, he's not going to spend one day behind bars, even though his crime was absolutely heinous and at the upper end of seriousness for what is one of the most serious crimes. It's an awful situation all round, and I don't think any outcome will be satisfactory or fair for any parties involved.

Balance of probabilties is not guilty at law. See the result of Pell with many unable to accept it.

 

[Kwality]

Seeking vindication, Christian Porter sues ABC for defamation

Porter has resisted an investigation into historical rape claims levelled against him. Ironically, a high-profile defamation trial would achieve many of the same aims.

www.crikey.com.au

'That Porter is turning to defamation law ....
what could be one of the biggest trials in Australian legal history. If Porter’s case ends up in court, Australia’s plaintiff-friendly defamation law gives him a very good chance at winning.

If the ABC apologises and retracts before it gets there, then the attorney-general gets a pyrrhic victory, and media companies become even more reluctant to touch such allegations again.'

From what we know of Porter, the 'rule of law' strategy, and defending himself, defamation action against the ABC was a natural next step.

Can the Federal Government Minister(s) responsible for the ABC, issue formal and allowable directives to the ABC Board on legal action, like that involving Porter?

Like direct them to retract and apologise and not to defend the defamation case against them?

No chance, Porter & Co want more than a retraction. No way Ms Milligan is going to avoid a day in Court & a probable 'journo revealing sources' version of 'I cant recall'.
Will the ABC call the group behind the dossier to support their claim of truth, & opened up to cross examination.

 

[utility]

Balance of probabilties is not guilty at law. See the result of Pell with many unable to accept it.

Depends on the procedure (e.g. criminal, civil; in some countries such as Russia they have administrative).

OJ Simpson was found not guilty in criminal proceedings but guilty in civil proceedings.

With some drug hearings (international sports) they have a different burden of evidence. There's also different forms of liability (e.g. strict, absolute). So it all comes down to the type of proceedings/procedural rules.

But yes, for a criminal charge of rape it is beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[utility]

No chance, Porter & Co want more than a retraction. No way Ms Milligan is going to avoid a day in Court & a probable 'journo revealing sources' version of 'I cant recall'.
Will the ABC call the group behind the dossier to support their claim of truth, & opened up to cross examination.

I agree that they would want to avoid disclosure and any sworn testimony, but I reckon they'd be after $$$ too.

 

[Lebbo73]

Highest head of law in government suing the state broadcaster - what a time to be alive.

No one is s above the law and that includes both parties.