Updated Bruce Lehrmann * Justice Lee - "Mr Lehrmann r*ped Ms Higgins."

[Kurve]

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

 

[Lady O]

I find the law surrounding rape to be very confusing. An alleged victim can be so drunk that they don't even remember if they had sex. They only have to "feel sore" the next day. The alleged rapist can be equally intoxicated but can be still held responsible. The alleged victim can be agreeable to having sex, but if he/she drops off to sleep during the act, then that can still be rape. The only defence that an alleged rapist can have is that no intercourse occurred.

 

[DropBearess]

I watched the PM's apology yesterday. I found his direct and specific inclusion of Ms. Higgins as a victim quite astonishing. In doing so he acknowledged an offence took place.

Surely this was subjudicial in the extreme as the word "alleged" was never used! How did this reference escape SM's advisory team?

The alleged perpetrator has indicated he will plead not guilty. He has not been tried and remains innocent until found guilty. We have heard nothing of his story.

Don't get me wrong here. Not for one moment do l doubt that profound apologies are required for the sordid behaviours inside Parliament House. But to specify one in particular which is before the courts is indicative of a very ignorant PM.

 

[utility]

I watched the PM's apology yesterday. I found his direct and specific inclusion of Ms. Higgins as a victim quite astonishing. In doing so he acknowledged an offence took place.

Surely this was subjudicial in the extreme as the word "alleged" was never used! How did this reference escape SM's advisory team?

The alleged perpetrator has indicated he will plead not guilty. He has not been tried and remains innocent until found guilty. We have heard nothing of his story.

Don't get me wrong here. Not for one moment do l doubt that profound apologies are required for the sordid behaviours inside Parliament House. But to specify one in particular which is before the courts is indicative of a very ignorant PM.

As indicated up-thread it may have been deliberate. The apology is for public consumption, but with the effect of prejudicing a fair an impartial hearing - so the accused 'gets off'.

Procedural fairness is absolutely sacrosanct in my book, else a (connected) judge can 'take matters into their own hands'. That is a frightening prospect. So he should be admonished for making such a statement at this point in time.

 

[geeeyejo]

I find the law surrounding rape to be very confusing. An alleged victim can be so drunk that they don't even remember if they had sex. They only have to "feel sore" the next day. The alleged rapist can be equally intoxicated but can be still held responsible. The alleged victim can be agreeable to having sex, but if he/she drops off to sleep during the act, then that can still be rape. The only defence that an alleged rapist can have is that no intercourse occurred.

People don’t “nod off” having consensual sex - that’s not a thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[TheJanuaryMan]

People don’t “nod off” having consensual sex - that’s not a thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Mrs TJM does.

 

[Lebbo73]

'She had the courage to speak': PM apologises to Brittany Higgins for her 'terrible' experience

Australia's political leaders formally apologise to all those who have experienced sexual harassment, sexual assault or bullying while working in federal parliament — an action recommended by an independent review into the building's workplace culture..

www.abc.net.au

Lehrman hasn't been convicted. Does this risk prejudicing the case?

Scummo’s a dh

 

[NicNat2TimKelly]

What did they discover about Ms Higgins alleged rapist's alleged serious misconduct from their April 4 meeting with the AFP, or elsewhere, that appears to have triggered terminating Ms Higgins alleged rapists employment?

It was about the security breach of accessing the office (drunk) out of hours.

Ms Higgins learned from the chief of staff that the Liberal staffer who had signed her into parliament that night, had agreed to resign that day, on the spot.

This related purely to the security breach and being in the office after hours.

Parliament House rocked by alleged rape

A Liberal Party staffer has alleged she was r*ped at Parliament House in Defence Minister Linda Reynolds’ ministerial office by a colleague, and claims she felt forced to choose between reporting it to the police or keeping her job.

www.news.com.au

Something else from that news report struck me as strange.

She remembers the man buying “lots of rounds of drinks” at the event before it was suggested he lived in the same direction and his taxi could drop her home on the way.

Instead, he took her to Parliament House.

He said he would get her home but when they roll up outside Parliament House instead and he asks her to get out she obliges rather than asking why the cab isn't taking her home. What I mean is she's portrayed a picture of only sharing a cab with him because he was going her way but that flies in the face of what actually occurred. If this part of her story is on shaky ground what other parts are?

 

[jason_recliner]

It was about the security breach of accessing the office (drunk) out of hours.

Parliament House rocked by alleged rape

A Liberal Party staffer has alleged she was r*ped at Parliament House in Defence Minister Linda Reynolds’ ministerial office by a colleague, and claims she felt forced to choose between reporting it to the police or keeping her job.

www.news.com.au

Something else from that news report struck me as strange.



He said he would get her home but when they roll up outside Parliament House instead and he asks her to get out she obliges rather than asking why the cab isn't taking her home. What I mean is she's portrayed a picture of only sharing a cab with him because he was going her way but that flies in the face of what actually occurred. If this part of her story is on shaky ground what other parts are?

I think I recall he told her he needed to get something from Parliament House. But I'm not certain.

 

[NicNat2TimKelly]

I think I recall he told her he needed to get something from Parliament House. But I'm not certain.

Still would make zero sense. What would he need to get at that hour that couldn't wait until normal working hours? Plus she could have said ... "Fine you run in and grab it while I wait in the cab. I'll only slow you down since I'm so pissed I can hardly walk".

 

[jason_recliner]

Still would make zero sense. What would he need to get at that hour that couldn't wait until normal working hours? Plus she could have said ... "Fine you run in and grab it while I wait in the cab. I'll only slow you down since I'm so pissed I can hardly walk".

Eh? That makes zero sense. How little do you think Parliament House is? And she was paralytic drunk. He probably said "I need to get something from the office, come in, we'll get an Uber afterwards". She was too dunk to realise he was dodgy.

 

[NicNat2TimKelly]

Eh? That makes zero sense. How little do you think Parliament House is?

Mate I know how big parliament house is, I've been there FFS. In any case it's irrelevant. They entered through the back entrance which is very close to the ministerial offices including the office of Linda Reynolds.

 

[Lady O]

People don’t “nod off” having consensual sex - that’s not a thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

They usually refer to it as "passing out", which makes the drunken nod off seem more like a 'medical issue'. But even if she was up for it before hand and then "passed out" or simply changed her mind, it is still rape. It's all about consent and if she was too drunk to give consent, then it's still rape.

 

[jason_recliner]

Mate I know how big parliament house is, I've been there FFS. In any case it's irrelevant. They entered through the back entrance which is very close to the ministerial offices including the office of Linda Reynolds.

Maybe she wasn't thinking clearly about the entrance and it's proximity to the ministerial offices at that point in time.

 

[NicNat2TimKelly]

Maybe she wasn't thinking clearly about the entrance and it's proximity to the ministerial offices at that point in time.

She wouldn't need to "think clearly" about it at all. She would instinctively know it. This was her daily workplace after all.

 

[Lebbo73]

They usually refer to it as "passing out", which makes the drunken nod off seem more like a 'medical issue'. But even if she was up for it before hand and then "passed out" or simply changed her mind, it is still rape. It's all about consent and if she was too drunk to give consent, then it's still rape.

What’s rape? He’s claiming that nothing happened.

 

[Lady O]

What’s rape? He’s claiming that nothing happened.

Exactly. That can be his only defence.

 

[Kurve]

His lawyers are lodging an aplplication for a permanent stay on proceedings and a ban on media reporting.

Lawyers for man accused of raping Brittany Higgins seek to stop media reporting, halt case

Lawyers for Bruce Lehrmann, the man accused of raping Brittany Higgins in Parliament House, are seeking a permanent stay on the case — which, if successful, means Mr Lehrmann would be unlikely to ever face trial.

www.abc.net.au

 

[jason_recliner]

His lawyers are lodging an aplplication for a permanent stay on proceedings and a ban on media reporting.

Lawyers for man accused of raping Brittany Higgins seek to stop media reporting, halt case

Lawyers for Bruce Lehrmann, the man accused of raping Brittany Higgins in Parliament House, are seeking a permanent stay on the case — which, if successful, means Mr Lehrmann would be unlikely to ever face trial.

www.abc.net.au

F##k. If this is granted I consider it a direct consequence of ScoMo's comments.

 

[Kwality]

F##k. If this is granted I consider it a direct consequence of ScoMo's comments.

I'd put my money on what the Judge says: ...
'Chief Justice McCallum issued a serious warning last week in court.

“A man has been accused of a very serious offence, it is an offence that can only be tried with a jury,” she said.

“The laws about contempt are well known in this country.

“Statements made before a criminal trial that might interfere with the administration of justice and, in particular, the ability of an accused man to have a fair trial risk falling in the classification of contempt.”



I'd paraphrase that as this matter is not going to be heard in the court of public opinion.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/brittany-higgins-rape-case-bruce-lehrmann-to-apply-for-trial-to-not-proceed/news-story/38aa7742a103d403a2e1434fdb0cceda

 

[jason_recliner]

I'd put my money on what the Judge says: ...
'Chief Justice McCallum issued a serious warning last week in court.

“A man has been accused of a very serious offence, it is an offence that can only be tried with a jury,” she said.

“The laws about contempt are well known in this country.

“Statements made before a criminal trial that might interfere with the administration of justice and, in particular, the ability of an accused man to have a fair trial risk falling in the classification of contempt.”



I'd paraphrase that as this matter is not going to be heard in the court of public opinion.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/brittany-higgins-rape-case-bruce-lehrmann-to-apply-for-trial-to-not-proceed/news-story/38aa7742a103d403a2e1434fdb0cceda

Exactly. Doesn't get much more contemptuous than Scotty the Ugly Fat Bastard stating in public that Higgins is a rape survivor.

 

[Kwality]

Exactly. Doesn't get much more contemptuous than Scotty the Ugly Fat Bastard stating in public that Higgins is a rape survivor.

Good to see the Courts view acknowledged, its up to Justice McCallum here.

 

[utility]

I'd put my money on what the Judge says: ...
'Chief Justice McCallum issued a serious warning last week in court.

“A man has been accused of a very serious offence, it is an offence that can only be tried with a jury,” she said.

Wasn't BRE found guilty by a judge and not a jury? Or am I mistaken?

To my knowledge a defendant has the right of election - either judge or jury trial in the case of serious (indictable) offences. In Australia you don't have a right to jury trial for summary offences, whereas in the USA I believe it can be any dispute of $20 or more.

I'd say the decision will come down to backdoor connections in Canberra. You'll get Scomo spouting "rule of law" again after the A-G debacle.

Edit: This on BRE:

Claremont killer convicted of murdering two women but judge rules not enough evidence in 'likely' third case

Bradley Robert Edwards is found guilty of murdering Jane Rimmer and Ciara Glennon in Perth almost 25 years ago, but Justice Stephen Hall rules the identity of Sarah Spiers's killer cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

www.abc.net.au

 

[BFew]

Has anyone received the letter from Lehmann's legals yet?

Lawyers for Higgins’ accused rapist want case halted, media blackout

Lawyers for Brittany Higgins’ accused rapist are calling on the media to remove published stories about the former parliamentary staffer’s allegations.

www.smh.com.au

'Mr Lehrmann’s barrister, David Campbell, SC, told the ACT Supreme Court his client’s lawyers would be writing to various media outlets seeking their co-operation to take down various articles referring to the allegations and would be asking for court orders if they didn’t consent.'

“We propose to write to the media today, or at worst tomorrow and give them seven days,” Mr Campbell said. “It is likely we wouldn’t have universal assent from the media for a take-down.”

However, media lawyer Justin Quill said it was “entirely unnecessary and inappropriate” for such an order to be made.'

'The matter will return to court on April 1.'

 

[BFew]

Wasn't BRE found guilty by a judge and not a jury? Or am I mistaken?

Different rules in the ACT.
Certain categories of crimes can only be a trial by Jury in the ACT.
That's already been discussed earlier in this thread I recall.

 

[Kwality]

Wasn't BRE found guilty by a judge and not a jury? Or am I mistaken?

To my knowledge a defendant has the right of election - either judge or jury trial in the case of serious (indictable) offences. In Australia you don't have a right to jury trial for summary offences, whereas in the USA I believe it can be any dispute of $20 or more.

I'd say the decision will come down to backdoor connections in Canberra. You'll get Scomo spouting "rule of law" again after the A-G debacle.

Edit: This on BRE:

Claremont killer convicted of murdering two women but judge rules not enough evidence in 'likely' third case

Bradley Robert Edwards is found guilty of murdering Jane Rimmer and Ciara Glennon in Perth almost 25 years ago, but Justice Stephen Hall rules the identity of Sarah Spiers's killer cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

www.abc.net.au

I'm on a different tram with Justice McCallum, how a person pleads isnt in the discussion, nor is the jury an issue.

This might assist you: Lawyers for man accused of raping Brittany Higgins seek to stop media reporting, halt case
&

Man accused of raping Brittany Higgins set to face trial in June next year

A tentative date is set for the trial of Bruce Lehrmann — the man accused of raping former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins inside Parliament House in 2019.

www.abc.net.au

Backdoor connections in Canberra you suggest, wonder how long you would last in Ms McCallums court room

Lucy McCallum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org