Updated Bruce Lehrmann Pt2 * ACT Bar clears former DPP head Shane Drumgold of misconduct

[Kurve]

Here is PART 1

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



FIONA BROWN - AFFIDAVIT

 

[Lady O]

um, how did you deduce that, from what was written. most odd.

What other event might have caused her to go from "Thank you, I wanted to say this in person but I can’t overstate how much I value your support and advice throughout this period.

“You have been absolutely incredible and I’m so appreciative.” to the exact opposite?

 

[FIGJAM]

So you don't think Sharaz had any influence over her in her change of mindset?

"Mr Sharaz, came into her life on 29 May 2020" - Justice Lee. After the flowers sent to Reynolds and thanks to Fiona Brown.

Why did Lee make a point of this precise moment?

It's so obvious and sad what has happened here.

 

[Kurve]

So you don't think Sharaz had any influence over her in her change of mindset?

If you look back at my posts, you'll find that I've acknowledged Sharaz entering the picture changed her circumstances and obviously particularly given they've stayed together, married and are now expecting a baby, probably had some influence over her.

At the same time though, there's a record of Higgins expressing resistance to what she clearly felt was Sharaz's interference.

 

[Lady O]

If you look back at my posts, you'll find that I've acknowledged Sharaz entering the picture changed her circumstances and obviously particularly given they've stayed together, married and are now expecting a baby, probably had some influence over her.

At the same time though, there's a record of Higgins expressing resistance to what she clearly felt was Sharaz's interference.

Yes, agreed. It seems she was suspicious of his motive right at the outset and wanted him to back off or at least to refer people to her rather than acting on her behalf without consulting her first.

During all this time, he seems to have tried to hide behind her, neither attending the Lehrmann v Ch 10 trial nor wanting to appear in Reynolds v Higgins trial, even though some of the comments that prompted the defamation action allegedly came directly from him.

 

[Festerz]

The true villain of a rape, is the rapist.

With due respect, you are looking at things from the wrong end. And it has given you a warped perspective of things.

So let's start again.

The first victim of rape is the person who has been r*ped.

Not just for the trauma and humiliation of the moment and the immediate aftermath but for the shame and trauma of the days, weeks, months and years that follow.

First of not believing what has happened yourself, but then the shame and trauma of realising that it DID happen. And facing up to the guilt and the embarrassment that it did, and what you might have done to encourage it.

And then having to dig deep to find the courage of telling others what happened. Especially if it happened at work by one of your work colleagues. Knowing what it might mean to your career and the respect of the people you work and socialise with.

So as a defensive mechanism, you tell the story of your trauma in bits. Like a packaged jigsaw puzzle of your worst nightmare that you can only let out of the bag bit by bit, lest it hurt you even more, but this time even deeper. Because by telling that story, by letting the nightmare out of the bag you want to keep secret, you are letting the nightmare, the rape, live again.

Your first instinct is protection, not just from further physical harm but from what you believe will follow - the shame, the recriminations, the blame. So you desperately looking for someone to trust - a friend and an ally who will believe your story and protect you from future harm.

That is when the real trauma begins. Because, that's when the pressure to tell your story to police starts to mount. The idea that if you don't , then your story lacks credibility. That's the time when your rape and your trauma becomes public property. And when the police become involved, the trauma and guilt only intensifies, crime statistics showing it rarely ends in a conviction let alone resolution for the victim - just more embarrassment and shame.

This is the story that is faced by ALL victims of sexual assault. Don't ask me to tell you again how I know but I do.

And Brittany Higgins, the victim of a horrendous sexual assault in her place of work - Parliament House ffs - has been through this trauma for over five fecken years.

And in the next week or so she will again be forced to tell her story of being r*ped for the public scrutiny of the
national press and social media whores.

But THIS time it will be at the behest of her own ****ing boss - a woman in a public position of power and privilege in whose workplace the rape occurred. For THREE social media posts.

When will it end?

So my response to your assertion is NO - There's more than one villain in this story. And the assault on the one true victim is continuing due to their actions.

 

[Underarrest_]

With due respect, you are looking at things from the wrong end. And it has given you a warped perspective of things.

So let's start again.

The first victim of rape is the person who has been r*ped.

Not just for the trauma and humiliation of the moment and the immediate aftermath but for the shame and trauma of the days, weeks, months and years that follow.

First of not believing what has happened yourself, but then the shame and trauma of realising that it DID happen. And facing up to the guilt and the embarrassment that it did, and what you might have done to encourage it.

And then having to dig deep to find the courage of telling others what happened. Especially if it happened at work by one of your work colleagues. Knowing what it might mean to your career and the respect of the people you work and socialise with.

So as a defensive mechanism, you tell the story of your trauma in bits. Like a packaged jigsaw puzzle of your worst nightmare that you can only let out of the bag bit by bit, lest it hurt you even more, but this time even deeper. Because by telling that story, by letting the nightmare out of the bag you want to keep secret, you are letting the nightmare, the rape, live again.

Your first instinct is protection, not just from further physical harm but from what you believe will follow - the shame, the recriminations, the blame. So you desperately looking for someone to trust - a friend and an ally who will believe your story and protect you from future harm.

That is when the real trauma begins. Because, that's when the pressure to tell your story to police starts to mount. The idea that if you don't , then your story lacks credibility. That's the time when your rape and your trauma becomes public property. And when the police become involved, the trauma and guilt only intensifies, crime statistics showing it rarely ends in a conviction let alone resolution for the victim - just more embarrassment and shame.

This is the story that is faced by ALL victims of sexual assault. Don't ask me to tell you again how I know but I do.

And Brittany Higgins, the victim of a horrendous sexual assault in her place of work - Parliament House ffs - has been through this trauma for over five fecken years.

And in the next week or so she will again be forced to tell her story of being r*ped for the public scrutiny of the
national press and social media whores.

But THIS time it will be at the behest of her own ****ing boss - a woman in a public position of power and privilege in whose workplace the rape occurred. For THREE social media posts.

When will it end?

So my response to your assertion is NO - There's more than one villain in this story. And the assault on the one true victim is continuing due to their actions.

With all respect, I said the true villain of a rape is the rapist.
I’m well aware of who the first victim is.
I wrote a post that is in my opinion and I stand by my opinion.

 

[Festerz]

With all respect, I said the true villain of a rape is the rapist.
I’m well aware of who the first victim is.
I wrote a post that is in my opinion and I stand by my opinion.

Of course it’s your opinion. This forum is full of opinions on everything from umpiring decisions to outcomes of court cases.

So please don’t get me wrong. There is no right and wrong here. Your opinion is as relevant as anyone’s.

But in my opinion, your opinion misses the point of where we currently stand in this matter. And I stand by that opinion.

 

[Underarrest_]

Of course it’s your opinion. This forum is full of opinions on everything from umpiring decisions to outcomes of court cases.

So please don’t get me wrong. There is no right and wrong here. Your opinion is as relevant as anyone’s.

But in my opinion, your opinion misses the point of where we currently stand in this matter. And I stand by that opinion.

Of course it’s your opinion. This forum is full of opinions on everything from umpiring decisions to outcomes of court cases.

So please don’t get me wrong. There is no right and wrong here. Your opinion is as relevant as anyone’s.

But in my opinion, your opinion misses the point of where we currently stand in this matter. And I stand by that opinion.

I think the point of my post was missed but I’ll leave it there.

 

[Satan]

The former Victorian political staffer who last year claimed she was r*ped by dumped Labor MP Will Fowles has broken her silence, saying the justice system is failing alleged victims.
The 41-year-old woman – who has asked for her identity to be protected – has also called for a cultural shift inside state parliament and the creation of a radical new mediation scheme for alleged victims and perpetrators.

The alleged victim claims she was attacked in a taxpayer-funded room at the five-star Le Meridien hotel on Bourke St on August 2, 2023.

 

[Underarrest_]

Correct on all fronts.

The one thing that is a bit off though is that Higgins gave Reynolds flowers and thanked her for her support, which is undisputed by Higgins in multiple trials under oath.

“She thanked me for being a great boss and being understanding and presented me with flowers. I genuinely wished her well in her new position.”

It's hard for Reynolds or Brown to have corrected their supposedly negative behaviour when they're getting positive feedback...

This might have been Brittany just trying to keep going and move forward. It brings me back to what ongoing support she had.

 

[Run n Spread]

The former Victorian political staffer who last year claimed she was r*ped by dumped Labor MP Will Fowles has broken her silence, saying the justice system is failing alleged victims.
The 41-year-old woman – who has asked for her identity to be protected – has also called for a cultural shift inside state parliament and the creation of a radical new mediation scheme for alleged victims and perpetrators.

The alleged victim claims she was attacked in a taxpayer-funded room at the five-star Le Meridien hotel on Bourke St on August 2, 2023.

This has been called for a few times.
How would a mediation scheme work?
Would an accused theoretically admit guilt without been prosecuted? ??
Would this be a mechanism if there is doubt if a rape occurred? (What is consensual or not or a he said she said??? In which case shouldn't the law be tightened?)
In this case police investigated and the prosecution found not enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. (So under the legal system he is presumed innocent)
What would mediation achieve? The accused couldn't be compelled to.go and would just deny the claims anyway.
Or similar to.a diversion system?? But isn't that for minor offences.

 

[Kurve]

This might be how Reynolds lawyers access the files to use from the Lehrmann defamation case in another state. Shifty.

Bennett said an alternative could be to use Brown’s evidence from Bruce Lehrmann’s failed defamation case against Network Ten.

Linda Reynolds’ former chief of staff may not be able to give evidence in defamation trial, court hears

Lawyers assessing a medical report about Fiona Brown, who worked in Reynolds’ office when Brittany Higgins was allegedly r*ped

www.theguardian.com

 

[Zing13]

But THIS time it will be at the behest of her own ****ing boss - a woman in a public position of power and privilege in whose workplace the rape occurred. For THREE social media posts.

When will it end?

This is what really gets me so mad with this trial. The fact that Reynolds still wants to push so hard for a f** apology for three social media posts, when it was determined by the balance of probabilities her employee was r** in her office and the way she handled it was questionable.

Like wtf?! I thought she was all about equality for women....

Sorry I know others have probably raised this, but I find it so frustrating when I see coverage of this trial on the news and everytime I think about the trial I always come back to this. Rant over....

 

[Festerz]

This might be how Reynolds lawyers access the files to use from the Lehrmann defamation case in another state. Shifty.

Bennett said an alternative could be to use Brown’s evidence from Bruce Lehrmann’s failed defamation case against Network Ten.

Linda Reynolds’ former chief of staff may not be able to give evidence in defamation trial, court hears

Lawyers assessing a medical report about Fiona Brown, who worked in Reynolds’ office when Brittany Higgins was allegedly r*ped

www.theguardian.com

Laughable if it wasn't a damning indictment of Reynolds' defamation action. Of course they don't want the one person who can bear witness to Reynolds claims and actions to be cross examined in specific relation to them. But I'll contain my anger until a decision is made on that request from Reynolds lawyers.

Speaking of laughable. Having received glowing references from Reynolds' long time partner, the Court has now now heard from her mum and dad about what a 'universally loved and respected' person Linda was before that rape victim brutally attacked her online.

So that settles it. (P.S., I have it on good authority that Linda is also loved by her pet poodle, Scotty - excepts when she forgets to feed him)

 

[Zing13]

Haha so many un-biased testimonies so far for Reynolds FFS

 

[Zing13]

Sorry if this has already been covered, but with the out of court settlement process if the defence offers something so as to not go ahead with the trial and the prosecution side says a flat no thanks, is that it? Like is there anyway of not going to court?
Especially if the prosecution is hell bent on taking it all the way to trial just for the satisfaction of saying I was right?

 

[Festerz]

This is what really gets me so mad with this trial. The fact that Reynolds still wants to push so hard for a f** apology for three social media posts, when it was determined by the balance of probabilities her employee was r** in her office and the way she handled it was questionable.

Like wtf?! I thought she was all about equality for women....

Sorry I know others have probably raised this, but I find it so frustrating when I see coverage of this trial on the news and everytime I think about the trial I always come back to this. Rant over....

Yep but let's be clear here. Reynolds' does not want a simple apology from her former employee. Because she got one of sorts in Brittany Higgins public statement after the finding in the Lehrmann defamation trial that (finally) gave public truth to her allegation that she had been r*ped by another one of Reynolds' employees in Reynolds' Parliamentary Office.

No - it's clear to all but her partisan cheer squad in sections of the media, that what Reynolds is after and why she is investing more than a million dollars into this personal action is public humiliation and financial ruin of her former employee and rape victim.

That she may well succeed due to the nature of Australia's (and Western Australia's in particular) plaintiff friendly defamation laws is the enduring shame on her and them.

 

[Kurve]

Laughable if it wasn't a damning indictment of Reynolds' defamation action. Of course they don't want the one person who can bear witness to Reynolds claims and actions to be cross examined in specific relation to them. But I'll contain my anger until a decision is made on that request from Reynolds lawyers.

I'll be a bit surprised if Brown's testimony in another court in another state is allowed to be used. Brown's previously hidden notes are now part of evidence in this new trial with the defence likely needing to question her on them.

 

[Satan]

Sorry if this has already been covered, but with the out of court settlement process if the defence offers something so as to not go ahead with the trial and the prosecution side says a flat no thanks, is that it? Like is there anyway of not going to court?
Especially if the prosecution is hell bent on taking it all the way to trial just for the satisfaction of saying I was right?

This is civil case , not criminal so no prosecution

 

[Festerz]

Sorry if this has already been covered, but with the out of court settlement process if the defence offers something so as to not go ahead with the trial and the prosecution side says a flat no thanks, is that it? Like is there anyway of not going to court?
Especially if the prosecution is hell bent on taking it all the way to trial just for the satisfaction of saying I was right?

It is up to the litigant (Reynolds) to cease her defamation action, regardless of what negotiation takes place in the settlement process. Clearly what was discussed/offered etc. as part of the pre-trial process was not satisfactory to Reynolds and so the action progressed to trial.

Goes without saying but settlement must be agreed by both parties.

What was discussed in the court mediated settlement process, and what was offered by Ms Higgins in trying to reach settlement, is obviously not publicly disclosed at this stage. However, it is likely to be a factor in determining what, if any, damages are awarded once a judgement on the defamation action has been reached.

(Edit: spelling errors)

 

[Zing13]

Thanks for explaining that for me.

Sorry for my incorrect terms to btw

 

[Kurve]

This might help explain my position, even if others don't agree with me, on why this is a new trial and while Lee's findings are obviously important, they are not legally binding with regards Reynolds, Higgins and Sharaz.

In Reynolds words.

 

[DapperDon]

This might help explain my position, even if others don't agree with me, on why this is a new trial and while Lee's findings are obviously important, they are not legally binding with regards Reynolds, Higgins and Sharaz.

In Reynolds words.

View attachment 2079867

Someone should send this to Janet

 

[Run n Spread]

This might help explain my position, even if others don't agree with me, on why this is a new trial and while Lee's findings are obviously important, they are not legally binding with regards Reynolds, Higgins and Sharaz.

In Reynolds words.

View attachment 2079867

Strong statement should've gone on a media blitz than left it there.
Has no one learnt? This is whole case is poison. And has been turned into a political football. Anyone going to court testifying etc or a party to this is getting absolutely shredded.
Everyone will just be bankrupted.
My $.02. Take it or leave it.
I posted at the time and based on the criminal trial there was not enough evidence to convict BL beyond reasonable doubt. Still don't.
With looser rules and everyone under cross in a civil trial I agree with Lee's findings that a rape on balance of probablity probably occurred.
I think BH was advised poorly. The media strategy while her right undermined the trial process and led to inconsistency on versions. Would've been better off waiting till after trial or not pursuing it.
Doubt there was a cover up. The Canberra bubble seems toxic thou. So while everything is politicised I don't think Reyonds or her cos deliberately threatened BH with her job.
Absolutely nuts of LR to.keep going with civil action. You are just pouring petrol on a bushfire. Judge found in another case no cover up go to the media do some pr and than drop.it.

 

[Lady O]

I don't think Reyonds or her cos deliberately threatened BH with her job.
Absolutely nuts of LR to.keep going with civil action. You are just pouring petrol on a bushfire. Judge found in another case no cover up go to the media do some pr and than drop.it.

I agree with you, but if she doesn't take it to court, they will continue to push their narrative that she and Brown did not support them and her job was threatened. It would have been simple for Higgins and Sharaz to admit to the lie and settle, but they refused. Reynolds deserves to clear her name.