Updated Bruce Lehrmann Pt2 * Reynolds Defamation Trial Current

[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

 

[FIGJAM]

I have yet to see why she wasn’t asked to take a seat at Reception and he wasn’t supervised when taken upstairs.

I get told off here for referencing Lee's verdict, but for a good summation of events (intertwined with some findings) you can go here:

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2024/2024fca0369

The go to section: G.3 Security and Entry to the Ministerial Suite

Probably a moot point. In no workplace that I managed would junior clerical staff be given access (i) in the wee small hours, (ii) on a weekend, (iii) pissed. Their names were not on any overtime roster given to Reception.

I agree with jason_recliner on this here that it is an office and not a construction site.

Luhrmann clearly thought that it was a good, safe place to rape a woman. He was correct.

Whilst I'm hesitant to put myself in the mind of a rapist, I've always thought it was logically a shithouse place to rape someone (literally signed in, dozens of CCTV's, chance of a security 'check in' at any second, victim could scream or even run out screaming to security etc.). It was actually a line of argument from Whybrow in Lehrmann's defence.

I do have a theory on what most likely happened (it's a slight riff on Lee's findings), but it'd be a whole other TL;DR post that I'm thread-famous for and I gotta run.

 

[Kurve]

I get told off here for referencing Lee's verdict

Spamming Lee's findings (as comments against Higgins) that were four months ago

Which incidentally I've spent nearly three days reading now and posted the link in the sticky

 

[FIGJAM]

Spamming Lee's findings (as comments against Higgins) that were four months ago

Apologies to all for spamming!

BTW "against Higgins" is a bit harsh. I'm pro-truth and a part of that overall truth is the post-Sharaz false narrative of the cover-up, coupled with a few other false claims.

Which incidentally I've spent nearly three days reading now and posted the link in the sticky

Excellent news!!

The accumulation of evidence / testimony and Lee's findings will provide a more balanced viewpoint and one based upon typical human behaviours (eg. the Entry to the Ministerial Suite component will provide a vastly different point of view to the last paragraph by Festerz above).

 

[Kurve]

The cops can take evidence regardless on the suspicion of a crime, particularly a serious crime. They didn't actually need Higgins permission to examine the couch.

Also, a bit of pot kettle there.

While the cops didn't need permission to examine Reynolds couch, if Reynolds had tried to deter them from doing so, they probably would have needed a warrant to get at it.

Just a thought.

I haven't seen if the police were questioned on whether they asked for access to examine the scene of the alleged (at that point) rape.

 

[Kurve]

BTW "against Higgins" is a bit harsh. I'm pro-truth and a part of that overall truth is the post-Sharaz false narrative of the cover-up, coupled with a few other false claims.

Many mistakes were made.

cover-up
/ˈkʌvərʌp/
noun

1. 1.
   an attempt to prevent people discovering the truth about a serious mistake or crime.
   "he is alleging a cover-up and calling for an investigation"

 

[jason_recliner]

... if Reynolds had tried to deter them from doing so, they probably would have needed a warrant to get at it.

Seems unlikely. She doesn't own the office, doesn't pay a lease AFAIK, and probably doesn't own the couch.

 

[Kurve]

Excellent news!!

The accumulation of evidence / testimony and Lee's findings will provide a more balanced viewpoint and one based upon typical human behaviours (eg. the Entry to the Ministerial Suite component will provide a vastly different point of view to the last paragraph by Festerz above).

Lee's findings still have no bearing on this defamation trial until or unless they're entered in to evidence, if I understand the point that Tottle will likely need to examine much of the material that Lee did but more importantly, significantly more that he didn't.

It's not an effort by me to wipe Lee's findings from the face of this board but to keep the thread focused on this defamation trial.

 

[Kurve]

Seems unlikely. She doesn't own the office, doesn't pay a lease AFAIK, and probably doesn't own the couch.

It's entry in to the office for a forensic examination that in normal circumstances, might be an issue. Not who owned the couch.

 

[jason_recliner]

It's entry in to the office for a forensic examination that in normal circumstances, might be an issue. Not who owned the couch.

The point being that the Commonwealth seems to own everything and pay for everything, so it would probably be the Commonwealth (via a PH Dept or some such) who could choose to require a warrant.

 

[FIGJAM]

Many mistakes were made.

cover-up
/ˈkʌvərʌp/
noun

1. 1.
   an attempt to prevent people discovering the truth about a serious mistake or crime.
   "he is alleging a cover-up and calling for an investigation"

How does people making "mistakes" along the way amount to a concerted collective-attempt to cover-up a crime?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

How does people making "mistakes" along the way amount to a concerted collective-attempt to cover-up a crime?

Do you think it was just a mistake to not tell the Prime Minister about an alleged rape in the Defence Ministers' office?

 

[FIGJAM]

...I understand the point that Tottle will likely need to examine much of the material that Lee did but more importantly, significantly more that he didn't.

"Significantly more"? Really??

I've been keeping an eye on proceedings and I've seen nothing other than 'rats and mice' points of difference from either side.

I even highlighted to you that one of the "new" points of evidence that you brought up surrounding "steam cleaning" claims was known at both Sofronoff and Lee's legal proceedings.

 

[Kurve]

How does people making "mistakes" along the way amount to a concerted collective-attempt to cover-up a crime?

How does people making "mistakes" along the way amount to a concerted collective-attempt to cover-up a crime?

Or a simple mistake that nobody rang the Minister for Defence Reynolds immediately, to tell her that there'd been a security breach that included entry in to her office

 

[FIGJAM]

Do you think it was just a mistake to not tell the Prime Minister about an alleged rape in the Defence Ministers' office?

How does that relate to a rape victim being forced to choose between her career and a pursuing a rape claim?

 

[Underarrest_]

Do you think it was just a mistake to not tell the Prime Minister about an alleged rape in the Defence Ministers' office?

This might have been helpful.
His wife Jenny seemed to have some good advice on how to manage a SA.

 

[Kurve]

"Significantly more"? Really??

I've been keeping an eye on proceedings and I've seen nothing other than 'rats and mice' points of difference from either side.

I even highlighted to you that one of the "new" points of evidence that you brought up surrounding "steam cleaning" claims was known at both Sofronoff and Lee's legal proceedings.

AFP officer Close has not been examined before.

Reynolds, AFP Officer Close and Samantha Maiden along with about fifteen other fresh witnesses

 

[BFew]

one of the "new" points of evidence that you brought up surrounding "steam cleaning" claims was known at both Sofronoff and Lee's legal proceedings.

There's a huge difference between evidence being brought up in a civil case, and a thorough cross examination of the witness and their alleged/hard to refute evidence in a criminal trial.

 

[FIGJAM]

Or a simple mistake that nobody rang the Minister for Defence Reynolds immediately, to tell her that there'd been a security breach that included entry in to her office

You and Ghost Patrol seem to think that senior people trying to handle things on the downlow is evidence of a concerted cover-up, rather than normal office behaviour.

There being anything other than a "party" (which is what they thought happened as evidence by Ramos the cleaner's directives) wasn't even on the radar yet.

Reynolds was 39 hours drive away (if you don't stop for sleep!), so them not bothering her until they've got some more facts is no big deal and she was ultimately informed in a timely manner.

 

[FIGJAM]

AFP Officer Close

I can only go on what the papers regurgitate, but she added nothing other than what she said in her statement.

She expressed shock and dismay at the couch being steam cleaned.

Then Senator Reynolds’ lawyer Martin Bennett asked Ms Close if she learnt that the couch “was not, in fact, steam-cleaned” and she replied: “No”.

Wasn't a whole lot going on there!

Samantha Maiden along with about fifteen other fresh witnesses

Outside of Sam, most of the witnesses were there for Reynolds. The latter didn't add much other than provide additional evidence contrary to the claims of maltreatment / "bullying".

I've said it a dozen times now; this trial should never have gone ahead. It's an inexplicable waste of time and money. And I blame all parties for their stubbornness.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

senior people trying to handle things on the downlow

precursor to a cover-up

Why didn't Prime Minister know about this until it was on TV, a couple of years later?

 

[Kurve]

You and Ghost Patrol seem to think that senior people trying to handle things on the downlow is evidence of a concerted cover-up, rather than normal office behaviour.

GP and I do have different ideas.

 

[FIGJAM]

Why didn't Prime Minister know about this until it was on TV, a couple of years later?

Because the potential claimant (who was taken to the police by her bosses) quietly chose not to proceed for her own personal reasons (both of which I have outlined earlier) and then life went on.

ScoMo was already in election mode, called an election at the latest possible time, fluked a win, then we had to deal with a 1 in 100 year pandemic.

 

[Kurve]

Reynolds was 39 hours drive away (if you don't stop for sleep!), so them not bothering her until they've got some more facts is no big deal and she was ultimately informed in a timely manner.

Reynolds was the Minister for Defence. It doesn't matter where she was, she should have been told immediately. This was raised by Brown with Reynolds.

She could have been back before Higgins even left the building.

 

[MPMonkeys]

Lee's findings still have no bearing on this defamation trial until or unless they're entered in to evidence, if I understand the point that Tottle will likely need to examine much of the material that Lee did but more importantly, significantly more that he didn't.

It's not an effort by me to wipe Lee's findings from the face of this board but to keep the thread focused on this defamation trial.

Ok but this works both ways.
I’d expect there be similar efforts to censor his finding that BL r*ped BH.

Given they are different trials and this isn’t even about that then that seems only fair.

Also any discussions about couches etc. they are not relevant to this trial.

 

[FIGJAM]

Reynolds was the Minister for Defence. It doesn't matter where she was, she should have been told immediately. This was raised by Brown with Reynolds.

When exactly was she informed again?