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

How long will the jury be out for?

  • Back the same afternoon

    Votes: 12 34.3%
  • One day

    Votes: 12 34.3%
  • Two days

    Votes: 6 17.1%
  • Three to five days

    Votes: 3 8.6%
  • Over a week

    Votes: 2 5.7%

  • Total voters
    35
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #21
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
 
Last edited:
Gosh there is one other accusation as far as I am aware made by someone who recognised him some two years later. I am not supporting him but this is not a fact “several allegations “. I have not seen the allegation of his housemate barricading her bedroom door. Pls can you supply the link?

Do a search for the housemate's account, it's in this thread somewhere and I can't be assed looking for it atm.

As information became available after Lehrmann was charged and we became aware that other women had made allegations one after the other, they were pooh-poohed in here as irrelevant and I came out then suggesting that they shouldn't be ignored because Lehrmann probably has other charges to face and voila .. Toowoomba. There was substance.

There may be even further charges yet that have been successfully suppressed.
 
Gosh there is one other accusation as far as I am aware made by someone who recognised him some two years later. I am not supporting him but this is not a fact “several allegations “. I have not seen the allegation of his housemate barricading her bedroom door. Pls can you supply the link?
Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist

GAQG6HHbgAAVKNu

 
Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist

GAQG6HHbgAAVKNu

Thanks, I had been unaware of this until now.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

How is this relevant to anything?
First of all this is a thread titled the 'Lehrmann Trials'.

Someone who claims to be unemployed, close to bankruptcy starting a legal action with a potential bill for the loser in the millions.

This is on top of his legal costs to defend the original rape charges and the substantial costs involved by his legal team to try and stop his name being released and to access the personal phone details of his alleged victim in the Toowoomba rape case.

That you think a journalist asking questions about where TF he is getting the money to cover his mounting legal costs to do this, with yet more court action for rape, lacks relevance tells us where you are coming from here.

I get that asking the question offends some posters here who want to see the world through a binary left v right political prism. But let's be clear - it IS a legitimate question for a journalist to ask. And Sam Maiden is not a journo who is inside the Labor camp, or any camp really.

And I make no apologies for highlighting articles from journos who have the courage to ask those questions and posting them here.

The relevance to this thread is flipping obvious, That you and a couple of other posters want to be the gatekeepers to stop those articles being posted tells its own story.
 
Last edited:
Makes me wonder a) why he is bringing the defamation forward and b) why Whybrow, who seems on the ball, would take the case forward.
a) Why does any lawyer take a case?

b) Why is Whybrow - a vocal opponent of the 'We Too' movement as a threat to justice - take on the criminal defence of Bruce Lehrmann in his trial for his rape of Brittany Higgins?


Screenshot 2023-12-04 at 10.06.27 am.png

c) Why is Whybrow now the lead prosecutor for Lehrmann's defamation action against the media organisations and identities who supported Lehrmann's alleged rape victim?

Wonder about that.

And wonder about how and why this low level Liberal Party adviser, claiming to be unemployed and near bankrupt, gets bankrolled to mount multiple legal actions with the costs in the millions and his rent in a premium Sydney apartment paid for a year - hidden from view.

It stinks.
 
Last edited:
b) Why is Whybrow - a vocal opponent of the 'We Too' movement as a threat to justice - take on the criminal defence of Bruce Lehrmann in his trial for his rape of Brittany Higgins?
Whybrow wasn't a vocal opponent of the Me Too movement, even being positive of recent changes in various systems, but rather a vocal opponent of going to the media first to air grievances and expressed concern that this whole fiasco will probably dissuade girls and women from coming forward in the fear that they will be paraded in front of the media like Brittany has (despite the fact that the laws are literally set up for full confidentiality and anonymity).

Channel 10 and Wilkinson deserve a whack here (as did Maiden and the ABC who have settled). Our legal system is set up the way it is for a reason. That might suck given that this bloke is probably a pest, but it's the behaviour of media participants here on trial.
 
Whybrow wasn't a vocal opponent of the Me Too movement

Yes he was and is - Whybrow specifically targeted the global 'me too' movement and used it as a platform in his opening statement of his cross examination of Brittany Higgins in the Lehrmann rape trial where Whybrow argued in his opening statement that inconsistencies in Ms. Higgins’s account had been overshadowed by a shift in the national conversation about violence against women.

The case, he said, epitomised the Mark Twain quote “never let the truth get in the way of a good story,” adding that “this was a story whose time had come.”

Against the backdrop Mr. Whybrow was describing — the national and global MeToo movement the judicial system will now scrutinise behaviour inside Australia’s insular and often unaccountable halls of power, with the prosecution expected to call a number of current and former government ministers and parliamentary staff members as witnesses.


Whybrow's narrative and Lehrmann's current defamation action has re-ignited the political attacks on the Me Too movement within Australia - including by Pauline Hanson in Parliament who claimed that 'lynching men is our national sport' and representatives of the Mens Rights Activists movement including Bettina Arndt - who posts with the mentoo hashtag and in 2019 went on a 'Fake Rape National Campus Tour' and who was in court during the first day of Mr Lehrmann's testimony.
 
Last edited:
Yes he was and is - Whybrow specifically targeted the global 'me too' movement and used it as a platform in his opening statement of his cross examination of Brittany Higgins in the Lehrmann rape trial where Whybrow argued in his opening statement that inconsistencies in Ms. Higgins’s account had been overshadowed by a shift in the national conversation about violence against women.

The case, he said, epitomised the Mark Twain quote “never let the truth get in the way of a good story,” adding that “this was a story whose time had come.”

Against the backdrop Mr. Whybrow was describing — the national and global MeToo movement the judicial system will now scrutinise behaviour inside Australia’s insular and often unaccountable halls of power, with the prosecution expected to call a number of current and former government ministers and parliamentary staff members as witnesses.


Whybrow's narrative and Lehrmann's current defamation action has re-ignited the political attacks on the Me Too movement within Australia - including by Pauline Hanson in Parliament who claimed that 'lynching men is our national sport' and representatives of the Mens Rights Activists movement including Bettina Arndt - who posts with the mentoo hashtag and in 2019 went on a 'Fake Rape National Campus Tour' and who was in court during the first day of Mr Lehrmann's testimony.
Whybrow's statements and reasoning within the Australian article that you provided above are entirely reasonable and hardly inflammatory fodder for right wing nut jobs.

I know you're 'Team Brittany no matter what' and view everyone on her side as saints and everyone else as sinners, but it's clearly not the case and not helpful to the complicated set of circumstances that we're dealing with.
 
Whybrow's statements and reasoning within the Australian article that you provided above are entirely reasonable and hardly inflammatory fodder for right wing nut jobs.

I know you're 'Team Brittany no matter what' and view everyone on her side as saints and everyone else as sinners, but it's clearly not the case and not helpful to the complicated set of circumstances that we're dealing with.
Just further on this, Sue Chrysanthou has over the years represented Pauline Hanson, Christian Porter, Sarah Hanson-Young and now represents Lisa Wilkinson.

What a barrister says in a court case is not necessarily representative of their personal beliefs.
 
I know you're 'Team Brittany no matter what'

Nope.

I'm just not 'Team Bruce'.

And guess what?

I won't be on 'Team Bruce' when the he he is up on yet more (and unrelated) charges of alleged rape in the Queensland Supreme Court next year either - again with yet another top shelf legal team funded from sources unknown (although there is a chance he may be able to finally pay back his anonymous financial backer if he wins his current defamation action).
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Nope.

I'm just not 'Team Bruce'.

And guess what?

I won't be on 'Team Bruce' when the he he is up on yet more (and unrelated) charges of alleged rape in the Queensland Supreme Court next year either - again with yet another top shelf legal team funded from sources unknown (although there is a chance he may be able to finally pay back his anonymous financial backer if he wins his current defamation action).
Can you explain the difference between a 'top-shelf' legal team and a 'non top-shelf' legal team?
And the only way it gets to the Supreme Court is if there is an appeal.
 
Can you explain why you stated as a fact that the only way a rape case in Queensland would get to the Supreme Court was via appeal?

Calling that statement ignorant is not abuse. It is a fact.
err, because that's how the court system works.
In Qld, rape cases are heard either in the Magistrates Court or the District Court.

Any appeals, go to the next rung up - so if case was heard in District Court, then appeal would go to Supreme Court.

This case would more than likely start in the Magistrates Court.
 
Can you explain why you stated that the only way a rape case in Queensland would get to the Supreme Court was via appeal?

Calling your statement ignorant is not abuse. It is a fact.

Lehrmann's Toowoomba rape trial IS being heard in the Qld Supreme Court. Just as his ACT trial was head in the ACT Supreme Court.
No - the appeal against the non-publication order went to the Supreme Court.
AFAIK - when and where his rape trial is to be held is TBD.
 
The revelation of the dishonest cheque book journalism of the Stokes' Seven Network Lehrmann interview gets the spotlight on Media Watch:



Edit: The full Media Watch Lehrmann expose - worth a watch:

 
Last edited:
The revelation of the dishonest cheque book journalism of the Stokes' Seven Network Lehrmann interview gets the spotlight on Media Watch:



There's calls for Seven's Spotlight to be dropped from the list of nominees for the Walkley Awards Scoop of the Year when it wasn't a scoop at all, it was a paid for interview with the added bonus of promoting Lehrmann's image as an innocent man.

And this while the Toowoomba matter was active.

It's pretty grubby.
 
There's calls for Seven's Spotlight to be dropped from the list of nominees for the Walkley Awards Scoop of the Year when it wasn't a scoop at all, it was a paid for interview with the added bonus of promoting Lehrmann's image as an innocent man.

And this while the Toowoomba matter was active.

It's pretty grubby.
Yep.

And as said multiple times this specific issue is not on Mr Lehrmann. Who wouldn't take free money if offered if you are nearly bankrupt.

This is on the media organisations and financial backers who are using this for their own purposes and trying their darnedest to keep it hidden from view and scrutiny.

And the question again is WHY?
 
I know it was ultimately the dodgy Stokes organisation that yielded the biggest chequebook / apartment, but surely there were other suitors in the wings?

The media will be coming out of this looking shithouse from all angles, undermining high-quality investigative journalism.
 
The media have been disgusting.
From the minute it began with the Wilkinson interview my heart just sank because I knew where it would end up, exactly where it is.
I’d had a lot of discussions, participated in training for 20 years etc trying to stamp out this workplace culture for a long time and work with great people to learn from such as Elizabeth Broderick.
There are so many levels here that do my head in particularly narratives that are created and followed that we all naively don’t even realize helps creeps. There have been some cases, one which I was involved in where some very narcissistic women have falsely accused people for financial gain and have come unstuck, one of them is in the news currently for a much bigger issue and the media are just relentless with it.
But the really shit part about it is these cases are used and manipulated not just by perpetrators, but lawyers and media which is just disgusting.

It’s why I may have seemed to harp on about the going out on the drink part because people like Broderick and her team have worked relentlessly to try to change that part of culture that was referred to in here where we all go out as employees to connect etc.
The poster was right because it’s something that it is sold to us all but used almost every single time (and it’s a hell of a lot of times believe me)for these horrible crimes that Lehrmann was accused of.
Hard enough to fight for yourself in the inebriated state let alone all this extra stuff where we see this one playing out publicly and it gave Higgins no chance for the right outcome if her version is true.
It makes you wonder just why and who keeps these avenues open to blur the lines . Sadly there are a lot more opportunistic sex predators in the workplace than people realize but they are very good at keeping the odd false accusation relevant.
Can’t stress enough seriously to educate young girls to not expose themselves to a night out like that unless they are in numbers or know them very, very well.
It’s sad but true.
 
Why didn't they get the other pre Brittany victims to press charges, or at least give evidence in the trial. I just don't thankfully understand the attraction of passed out women, it is truly sick and of course criminal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top