1
00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:02,600
Speaker 1: A quick note before we jump into today's episode that

2
00:00:02,720 --> 00:00:06,320
Speaker 1: tda's editor and familiar voice on this podcast is Billy

3
00:00:06,320 --> 00:00:10,800
Speaker 1: Fitzsimon's Lisa Wilkinson's daughter. Billy had no editorial oversight or

4
00:00:10,880 --> 00:00:13,920
Speaker 1: involvement with this podcast or any post we've made on

5
00:00:13,960 --> 00:00:17,880
Speaker 1: this topic already. And this is this is the Daily Oh,

6
00:00:18,040 --> 00:00:19,760
Speaker 1: this is the Daily OS.

7
00:00:19,760 --> 00:00:21,480
Speaker 2: Oh, Now it makes sense.

8
00:00:29,320 --> 00:00:32,040
Speaker 1: Good morning, and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Thursday,

9
00:00:32,080 --> 00:00:33,040
Speaker 1: the fourth of December.

10
00:00:33,240 --> 00:00:35,560
Speaker 2: I'm Zara Seidler, I'm Emma Gillespie.

11
00:00:35,800 --> 00:00:39,680
Speaker 1: Yesterday, former Liberal staffer Bruce Lhman lost the appeal of

12
00:00:39,720 --> 00:00:44,360
Speaker 1: his failed defamation case against Network ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson.

13
00:00:44,800 --> 00:00:47,640
Speaker 1: It comes after the Federal Court ruled last year that

14
00:00:47,840 --> 00:00:50,880
Speaker 1: it was more likely than not that Lherman raped Britney

15
00:00:50,960 --> 00:00:55,120
Speaker 1: Higgins at Parliament House back in twenty nineteen. In today's podcast,

16
00:00:55,240 --> 00:00:58,000
Speaker 1: m we're going to explain this latest judgment and what

17
00:00:58,080 --> 00:01:00,600
Speaker 1: it means for the very long run case.

18
00:01:04,319 --> 00:01:08,280
Speaker 2: Okay, Zara, we have covered this case many, many times

19
00:01:08,360 --> 00:01:11,200
Speaker 2: over the past several years. It has been a long

20
00:01:11,280 --> 00:01:14,440
Speaker 2: running saga and a pretty difficult one to keep up with.

21
00:01:14,720 --> 00:01:17,560
Speaker 2: I think if you are just in the general public

22
00:01:17,680 --> 00:01:20,600
Speaker 2: dipping in and out. But for anyone who might have

23
00:01:20,760 --> 00:01:24,560
Speaker 2: forgotten or might be confused, what is the background to

24
00:01:24,640 --> 00:01:26,119
Speaker 2: this appeal that we need to know about.

25
00:01:26,560 --> 00:01:30,200
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're right, this has had many turns and many twists.

26
00:01:30,319 --> 00:01:33,319
Speaker 1: But what you need to know is that Bruce Lherman,

27
00:01:33,520 --> 00:01:36,880
Speaker 1: who I mentioned at the top, is a former Liberal staffer,

28
00:01:37,400 --> 00:01:41,600
Speaker 1: launched defamation proceedings over an interview broadcast on TENS the

29
00:01:41,680 --> 00:01:44,880
Speaker 1: Project in twenty twenty one. That show is no longer

30
00:01:44,959 --> 00:01:47,160
Speaker 1: even running and I think that shows how long this

31
00:01:47,240 --> 00:01:51,120
Speaker 1: has been going on for. During that interview, Britney Higgins,

32
00:01:51,240 --> 00:01:55,240
Speaker 1: also a former Liberal staffer, alleged to journalist Lisa Wilkinson

33
00:01:55,440 --> 00:01:58,520
Speaker 1: that Lehman had raped her in Parliament House in March

34
00:01:58,600 --> 00:02:03,080
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen. Lerman, who to this day maintains his innocence,

35
00:02:03,600 --> 00:02:07,040
Speaker 1: was not named in the interview, either by Higgins nor

36
00:02:07,240 --> 00:02:11,680
Speaker 1: by Wilkinson. However, Bruce Lehman has alleged that his reputation

37
00:02:11,840 --> 00:02:15,200
Speaker 1: was damaged and as such that he was defamed because

38
00:02:15,240 --> 00:02:18,600
Speaker 1: he was identifiable, so his name was not said, but

39
00:02:18,680 --> 00:02:21,640
Speaker 1: he argued at the time that his identity was still

40
00:02:21,720 --> 00:02:23,600
Speaker 1: clear okay, that people.

41
00:02:23,440 --> 00:02:27,560
Speaker 2: Who maybe knew him knew his job could have pieced

42
00:02:27,600 --> 00:02:30,760
Speaker 2: together the details from the interview and landed on him

43
00:02:30,800 --> 00:02:33,480
Speaker 2: being the alleged suspect exactly.

44
00:02:33,600 --> 00:02:36,000
Speaker 1: And it was on that basis that Bruce Lehman brought

45
00:02:36,000 --> 00:02:40,559
Speaker 1: a defamation case against both Network ten and Lisa Wilkinson.

46
00:02:40,919 --> 00:02:44,200
Speaker 1: Now fast forward to that case. One of the ways

47
00:02:44,240 --> 00:02:46,960
Speaker 1: to defend a defamation case is to prove that the

48
00:02:47,000 --> 00:02:50,920
Speaker 1: claims made were truthful, and so that is what both

49
00:02:50,960 --> 00:02:54,799
Speaker 1: Wilkinson and Ten used during that case as a defense.

50
00:02:55,120 --> 00:02:58,840
Speaker 2: So they said, in a nutshell, we did not defame

51
00:02:58,919 --> 00:03:01,440
Speaker 2: Bruce Lemmon because the claims that and the interview are true.

52
00:03:01,639 --> 00:03:04,639
Speaker 1: Correct. That is what they argued, and we had a

53
00:03:04,720 --> 00:03:08,000
Speaker 1: judgment back in twenty twenty four at the time, Justice

54
00:03:08,040 --> 00:03:11,040
Speaker 1: Michael Lee ruled the claims laid out by Wilkinson and

55
00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:15,160
Speaker 1: Ten that Lehman raped Higgins were true on the balance

56
00:03:15,200 --> 00:03:18,639
Speaker 1: of probabilities, so more likely than not that those claims

57
00:03:18,680 --> 00:03:22,840
Speaker 1: were true. Important to note that this was a civil case,

58
00:03:22,919 --> 00:03:25,480
Speaker 1: it was not a criminal case, and so that standard

59
00:03:25,480 --> 00:03:27,760
Speaker 1: of proof was a bit lower than it is in

60
00:03:27,800 --> 00:03:28,640
Speaker 1: a criminal case.

61
00:03:29,000 --> 00:03:33,079
Speaker 2: So civil balance of probabilities criminal case, a claim has

62
00:03:33,120 --> 00:03:35,480
Speaker 2: to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

63
00:03:35,640 --> 00:03:38,960
Speaker 1: Yes, but that was found to be the case in

64
00:03:39,280 --> 00:03:42,960
Speaker 1: this specific defamation case. Now, there was a lot said

65
00:03:43,080 --> 00:03:46,280
Speaker 1: in that judgment. We've done a bunch of podcasts on that,

66
00:03:46,600 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 1: so I won't rehash everything that was said by Justice

67
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:52,800
Speaker 1: Lee at the time, but I do think that it's

68
00:03:52,840 --> 00:03:56,320
Speaker 1: important to note that Lee's ruling stated that Lherman could

69
00:03:56,320 --> 00:04:00,280
Speaker 1: not have been defamed because the allegations were truthful. Many

70
00:04:00,280 --> 00:04:03,760
Speaker 1: listeners will remember the now famous line from Lee, who

71
00:04:03,800 --> 00:04:06,520
Speaker 1: when he handed down the judgment said, and I quote,

72
00:04:06,840 --> 00:04:10,080
Speaker 1: having escaped the lion's den, Lehman made the mistake of

73
00:04:10,120 --> 00:04:13,080
Speaker 1: going back for his hat. At the time, the court

74
00:04:13,200 --> 00:04:16,400
Speaker 1: ordered Bruce Lehmon to paid two million dollars in legal costs.

75
00:04:16,680 --> 00:04:20,800
Speaker 2: So Justice Lee's assertion there being that there were these

76
00:04:20,839 --> 00:04:26,159
Speaker 2: allegations of rape, but Lermon decided to fight against them

77
00:04:26,160 --> 00:04:30,160
Speaker 2: with this defamation case, ultimately, in his perspective, wasting the

78
00:04:30,200 --> 00:04:33,080
Speaker 2: court's time. There were those costs that were ordered to

79
00:04:33,120 --> 00:04:37,360
Speaker 2: be paid. So the ruling was that Lehmon was not defamed. YEP,

80
00:04:37,560 --> 00:04:40,400
Speaker 2: that was in twenty twenty four last year. It's now

81
00:04:40,440 --> 00:04:41,919
Speaker 2: nearly the end of twenty twenty five and we are

82
00:04:41,960 --> 00:04:43,000
Speaker 2: still talking about this.

83
00:04:43,920 --> 00:04:47,239
Speaker 1: Why is that, well, if we're to continue with Justice

84
00:04:47,320 --> 00:04:51,039
Speaker 1: Lee's turner phrase. Bruce Lehman went back into the lions

85
00:04:51,080 --> 00:04:55,719
Speaker 1: den yet again when he filed an appeal against Lee's

86
00:04:55,720 --> 00:05:00,440
Speaker 1: findings on four main grounds. So he appealed the failed

87
00:05:00,560 --> 00:05:05,280
Speaker 1: defamation case. He appealed on the basis that he believed

88
00:05:05,320 --> 00:05:07,880
Speaker 1: he was denied fairness on some of the claims made

89
00:05:07,880 --> 00:05:11,919
Speaker 1: against him, and that Justice Lee had erred in accepting

90
00:05:12,120 --> 00:05:15,839
Speaker 1: the truth defense. And so we had a full bench

91
00:05:15,920 --> 00:05:18,839
Speaker 1: of the Federal Court, so three judges who weren't involved

92
00:05:18,839 --> 00:05:22,080
Speaker 1: in the original case they heard the appeal, and that

93
00:05:22,320 --> 00:05:25,440
Speaker 1: was a little while ago. At the time, Lehman's lawyer,

94
00:05:25,560 --> 00:05:29,400
Speaker 1: Zalie Burrows, told the court that her client was probably

95
00:05:29,480 --> 00:05:34,240
Speaker 1: Australia's most hated man, and she cited abusive social media

96
00:05:34,279 --> 00:05:38,359
Speaker 1: posts directed at him. She argued that Justice Lee in

97
00:05:38,480 --> 00:05:42,240
Speaker 1: the defamation case had turned it into an unfair quasi

98
00:05:42,440 --> 00:05:45,680
Speaker 1: rape trial. So that was essentially just giving you a

99
00:05:45,680 --> 00:05:47,400
Speaker 1: bit of color as to what Bruce Lemon and his

100
00:05:47,480 --> 00:05:51,479
Speaker 1: lawyer were arguing. That hearing wrapped up early at the

101
00:05:51,640 --> 00:05:54,360
Speaker 1: end of the second day, after the panel of Federal

102
00:05:54,400 --> 00:05:59,200
Speaker 1: Court judges said they struggled to understand Burrows's argument.

103
00:05:59,000 --> 00:06:01,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, I remember this on earlier in the year, and

104
00:06:01,560 --> 00:06:05,520
Speaker 2: we were expecting the appeals hearings to last a lot

105
00:06:05,600 --> 00:06:08,360
Speaker 2: longer than those two days. It all ended quite abruptly

106
00:06:08,440 --> 00:06:11,279
Speaker 2: at the time, and there was some confusion as to why,

107
00:06:11,360 --> 00:06:14,760
Speaker 2: and it came down to that legal argument. So we

108
00:06:14,880 --> 00:06:19,520
Speaker 2: got the result from that appeal yesterday, some months in

109
00:06:19,600 --> 00:06:23,520
Speaker 2: between the hearings ending and that final word being handed down.

110
00:06:24,160 --> 00:06:29,440
Speaker 1: What was it. Lehman's appeal was rejected. So Justice Michael Wigney,

111
00:06:29,640 --> 00:06:33,719
Speaker 1: who is not Justice Lee, different person, yep, He explained

112
00:06:33,760 --> 00:06:37,640
Speaker 1: the panel of judges reasoning for dismissing the appeal. He

113
00:06:37,760 --> 00:06:40,720
Speaker 1: said that the judges found that Lee had not denied

114
00:06:40,800 --> 00:06:44,440
Speaker 1: Leermon fairness in the defamation case. He also said, and

115
00:06:44,480 --> 00:06:46,880
Speaker 1: I thought that this was interesting that the judges had

116
00:06:46,920 --> 00:06:51,760
Speaker 1: concluded that Lehman knew Higgins had not consented to sex.

117
00:06:52,400 --> 00:06:55,240
Speaker 1: That was a different finding to what Justice Lee had

118
00:06:55,279 --> 00:06:58,400
Speaker 1: found and it was almost elevating what they understood to

119
00:06:58,480 --> 00:07:01,080
Speaker 1: have happened at the time in front of the law.

120
00:07:01,400 --> 00:07:04,279
Speaker 1: Lehman's appeal was dismissed, as I said, and he was

121
00:07:04,440 --> 00:07:07,160
Speaker 1: again ordered to pay the other side's costs.

122
00:07:07,520 --> 00:07:12,040
Speaker 2: So we have this fresh panel of judges reassessing what

123
00:07:12,280 --> 00:07:17,800
Speaker 2: went on in those initial defamation proceedings, ultimately upholding Justice

124
00:07:17,800 --> 00:07:22,160
Speaker 2: Michael Lee's findings, also finding that he acted fairly and

125
00:07:22,760 --> 00:07:28,080
Speaker 2: reaffirming essentially the truth defense that Lehmann did rape Higgins

126
00:07:28,160 --> 00:07:33,120
Speaker 2: according to the court. So he's lost his defamation case,

127
00:07:33,560 --> 00:07:37,440
Speaker 2: he's lost his subsequent appeal. What happens now for Bruce.

128
00:07:37,280 --> 00:07:42,760
Speaker 1: Lemon yees so he could appeal this decision in Australia's

129
00:07:42,760 --> 00:07:43,840
Speaker 1: top court, the High.

130
00:07:43,680 --> 00:07:46,560
Speaker 2: Court, which would take the appeal from the Federal Court

131
00:07:46,760 --> 00:07:48,360
Speaker 2: to a more senior court.

132
00:07:48,520 --> 00:07:51,960
Speaker 1: Correct, But it doesn't automatically happen. What needs to happen

133
00:07:52,120 --> 00:07:55,120
Speaker 1: is that Lehman would first need to seek permission for

134
00:07:55,160 --> 00:07:58,000
Speaker 1: his appeal to be heard, and that would need to

135
00:07:58,040 --> 00:08:00,400
Speaker 1: be accepted by the High Court in a order for

136
00:08:00,440 --> 00:08:03,960
Speaker 1: the case to progress. For example, with Ben Roberts Smith,

137
00:08:04,240 --> 00:08:07,400
Speaker 1: he did this, He requested that the court here his

138
00:08:07,560 --> 00:08:10,800
Speaker 1: appeal and they rejected that. If that happens, that is

139
00:08:10,840 --> 00:08:13,600
Speaker 1: the end of the road for appeals and the Federal

140
00:08:13,640 --> 00:08:17,000
Speaker 1: Court's judgment is final, So there would be no other

141
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:20,040
Speaker 1: avenues for Bruce Lehmon to continue to try and progress

142
00:08:20,080 --> 00:08:20,600
Speaker 1: this case.

143
00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:24,480
Speaker 2: Do we know if he is planning to appeal the appeal.

144
00:08:24,960 --> 00:08:29,120
Speaker 1: Lots of appeals In that one sentence, Yes, AAP is

145
00:08:29,200 --> 00:08:33,760
Speaker 1: reporting that Lehman is planning to appeal his appeal, So

146
00:08:34,040 --> 00:08:35,760
Speaker 1: we're going to have to wait and see if that's

147
00:08:35,800 --> 00:08:40,160
Speaker 1: the case. There are obviously costs involved as well, so

148
00:08:40,320 --> 00:08:41,440
Speaker 1: we'll keep an eye on that one.

149
00:08:41,960 --> 00:08:44,839
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think if we look at what Bruce

150
00:08:44,880 --> 00:08:48,439
Speaker 2: Lemon's lawyer, Zali Burrows was saying outside of court yesterday,

151
00:08:48,960 --> 00:08:52,719
Speaker 2: it certainly sounds like they are maybe interested in continuing

152
00:08:52,800 --> 00:08:57,280
Speaker 2: to defend this. Burrows said, quote, Bruce is really overwhelmed.

153
00:08:57,400 --> 00:08:59,520
Speaker 2: I just want everyone to remember that at the heart

154
00:08:59,520 --> 00:09:01,320
Speaker 2: of the matter, we have a young man who was

155
00:09:01,400 --> 00:09:05,800
Speaker 2: accused of rape at Parliament House. Bruce's life has been destroyed.

156
00:09:06,080 --> 00:09:08,880
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's certainly the type of language that's been

157
00:09:09,000 --> 00:09:10,200
Speaker 1: used this whole time.

158
00:09:10,360 --> 00:09:11,120
Speaker 2: Yes, exactly.

159
00:09:11,480 --> 00:09:14,320
Speaker 1: I should say not just in this case, but in

160
00:09:14,440 --> 00:09:18,400
Speaker 1: other cases, so not to confuse listeners, but this is

161
00:09:18,520 --> 00:09:20,440
Speaker 1: likely not to be the last time that we hear

162
00:09:20,480 --> 00:09:24,720
Speaker 1: about Bruce Lehman in the headlines, even this week. Bruce

163
00:09:24,800 --> 00:09:28,480
Speaker 1: Lehman is actually also due to face court in Tasmania

164
00:09:28,880 --> 00:09:33,800
Speaker 1: today for a separate case that is in regards to

165
00:09:34,320 --> 00:09:37,800
Speaker 1: an allegation that he stole a car in Tasmania in

166
00:09:38,000 --> 00:09:42,360
Speaker 1: November last year, and that case has been postponed for

167
00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:45,360
Speaker 1: a number of reasons. Lehman's lawyers argue that there were

168
00:09:45,480 --> 00:09:48,160
Speaker 1: medical reasons why he couldn't appear before the court and

169
00:09:48,200 --> 00:09:51,280
Speaker 1: so that's been delayed until now where he is again,

170
00:09:51,600 --> 00:09:54,960
Speaker 1: as I said, expected to face court on that charge.

171
00:09:54,720 --> 00:09:58,439
Speaker 2: Completely separate to the defamation and the parliament House allegations.

172
00:09:58,640 --> 00:10:01,640
Speaker 1: Correct, But there is also a another case, a third one.

173
00:10:01,679 --> 00:10:04,920
Speaker 1: There is a third and also separate case. Bruce Lemon

174
00:10:04,960 --> 00:10:08,680
Speaker 1: has also been accused of rape into Woomba in Queensland.

175
00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:11,520
Speaker 1: While the defamation case that we've been speaking about throughout

176
00:10:11,520 --> 00:10:14,480
Speaker 1: this podcast is a civil case, as I mentioned, this

177
00:10:14,520 --> 00:10:17,600
Speaker 1: one is a criminal case in regards to the charge

178
00:10:17,720 --> 00:10:20,920
Speaker 1: of rape. These charges were first heard in court in

179
00:10:21,000 --> 00:10:25,240
Speaker 1: January of twenty twenty three and that trial is forthcoming.

180
00:10:25,280 --> 00:10:28,240
Speaker 1: We don't really have much more information. We do know

181
00:10:28,400 --> 00:10:32,240
Speaker 1: that Zali Burrow's, the lawyer who has defended Bruce Lemon

182
00:10:32,640 --> 00:10:36,040
Speaker 1: in the civil case, is expected to be defending him

183
00:10:36,080 --> 00:10:39,640
Speaker 1: here as well. So again there is a lot happening,

184
00:10:39,720 --> 00:10:42,439
Speaker 1: a lot of different court cases, all kind of happening

185
00:10:42,440 --> 00:10:44,280
Speaker 1: at the same time, but we will be sure to

186
00:10:45,000 --> 00:10:46,800
Speaker 1: update listeners as we learn more.

187
00:10:47,120 --> 00:10:49,800
Speaker 2: Thank you so much, Zara for breaking that all down

188
00:10:49,920 --> 00:10:53,640
Speaker 2: for us, so just to recap, the appeal could yet

189
00:10:53,679 --> 00:10:58,320
Speaker 2: be appealed in the High Court TBC. Lemon is appearing

190
00:10:58,360 --> 00:11:01,160
Speaker 2: in Tasmania for a separate case this week about the

191
00:11:01,200 --> 00:11:05,040
Speaker 2: alleged stolen car, and there is that criminal case regarding

192
00:11:05,160 --> 00:11:09,199
Speaker 2: the rape allegation into Woomba, Queensland. Correct lots to keep

193
00:11:09,240 --> 00:11:11,560
Speaker 2: an eye on, and we will continue to do so

194
00:11:11,679 --> 00:11:13,880
Speaker 2: here at The Daily OS. Zara, Thank you so.

195
00:11:13,920 --> 00:11:16,640
Speaker 1: Much, Thank you em and thank you for joining us

196
00:11:16,640 --> 00:11:19,600
Speaker 1: for another episode of The Daily OS. If you need support,

197
00:11:19,720 --> 00:11:22,640
Speaker 1: please reach out to one eight hundred. Respect, take care

198
00:11:22,679 --> 00:11:28,880
Speaker 1: of yourself, and we'll be back again later today. My

199
00:11:29,000 --> 00:11:31,920
Speaker 1: name is Lily Madden and I'm a proud Arunda Bungelung

200
00:11:32,000 --> 00:11:36,320
Speaker 1: Calcuttin woman from Gadighl Country. The Daily oz acknowledges that

201
00:11:36,400 --> 00:11:38,840
Speaker 1: this podcast is recorded on the lands of the Gadighl

202
00:11:38,880 --> 00:11:42,200
Speaker 1: people and pays respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait

203
00:11:42,280 --> 00:11:45,199
Speaker 1: Island and nations. We pay our respects to the first

204
00:11:45,200 --> 00:11:47,720
Speaker 1: peoples of these countries, both past and present,