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

 

[Kurve]

As a victim of rape, B would have lost part of her identity.
Wouldn’t it be important for her to be able to stay in a her position to maybe keep part of her identity?

Higgins was a volunteer for the Young Liberals while she was still in high school.

 

[CredibleSauce]

The issue re the DNA is not if it would still be there or not. The issue is how can the prosecution prove that it came from Leahrman on that night and in the circumstances posed by the prosecution given the amount of time that has passed.

If the DNA evidence was presented after all this time, ironically the current trial in Toowoomba could actually help Learhman in this regard as he could say it was from another night he snuck in!

Exactly right. Given the culture of Parliament House at the time BL could easily explain it away with the old
desk wank excuse.

 

[FIGJAM]

Looks to be in the order of $70k in 2021 based on her payout. Pretty good for a junior admin in 2021.

***** Nobody knows her financial situation except herself! And if she was living pay to pay (like most of us a year or so out of Uni!), so what?!

Whilst nobody knows about her "need" to keep the job financially, she did however express a great 'want' to keep the job, in that she stated many times that it was her "dream job". So it's not like she can defect and go to one of the other Federal Parliaments. And of course that would have weighed on her decisions.

What we do know though are that the reasons she gave for not wanting to proceed with the charge was the daunting nature of a criminal investigation and not wanting to be known as the girl r*ped in Parliament. Both perfectly understandable reasons. But she didn't mention money once to Dillaway ***

 

[Underarrest_]

https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/linda-reynolds-returns-to-105m-home-she-could-be-forced-to-sell-after-defamation-case-against-brittany-higgins-david-sharaz/news-story/fa365119486fc24394dccef8bce88bfa?amp

Reports are that legal fees could cost Reynolds a million dollars.
I don’t understand why anyone would spend this much money on legal fees for anything.
Reynold’s has a nice home, holiday home in Bali, a supportive partner and family and could retire more than comfortably with a career behind her. Even if she thought she’d done the right thing at the time, there’s going to be people who like and dislike her in the world even before all of this.

 

[campbell]

https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/linda-reynolds-returns-to-105m-home-she-could-be-forced-to-sell-after-defamation-case-against-brittany-higgins-david-sharaz/news-story/fa365119486fc24394dccef8bce88bfa?amp

Reports are that legal fees could cost Reynolds a million dollars.
I don’t understand why anyone would spend this much money on legal fees for anything.
Reynold’s has a nice home, holiday home in Bali, a supportive partner and family and could retire more than comfortably with a career behind her. Even if she thought she’d done the right thing at the time, there’s going to be people who like and dislike her in the world even before all of this.

She chose this path.

 

[Kurve]

https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/linda-reynolds-returns-to-105m-home-she-could-be-forced-to-sell-after-defamation-case-against-brittany-higgins-david-sharaz/news-story/fa365119486fc24394dccef8bce88bfa?amp

Reports are that legal fees could cost Reynolds a million dollars.
I don’t understand why anyone would spend this much money on legal fees for anything.
Reynold’s has a nice home, holiday home in Bali, a supportive partner and family and could retire more than comfortably with a career behind her. Even if she thought she’d done the right thing at the time, there’s going to be people who like and dislike her in the world even before all of this.

She chose this path.

Reynolds could have kicked back in Bali and written a book.

 

[Underarrest_]

Reynolds could have kicked back in Bali and written a book.

Totally agree, whilst sipping on cocktails.

 

[Kurve]

Totally agree, whilst sipping on cocktails.

There might have been some dignity in that and I'm sure all her supporters would have bought a copy. Whatever money she lost could have been recovered and she's had her say.

 

[Festerz]

Reynold’s has a nice home, holiday home in Bali,

Well she had a nice home in Australia, until she mortgaged it to pay for those legal fees to sue her former staffer.

She said she did that earlier this year right? Mortgaged her Perth family home to commence legal action I mean?

Hmmm. What was this about then I wonder.

 

[BFew]

Well she had a nice home in Australia, until she mortgaged it to pay for those legal fees to sue her former staffer.

She said she did that earlier this year right? Mortgaged her home to commence legal action I mean?

Hmmm. What was this about then I wonder.


View attachment 2093933

Maybe transferred it to a family member or put it into a different vehicle, like a family trust or a self-managed super fund?

 

[Underarrest_]

Maybe transferred it to a family member or put it into a different vehicle, like a family trust or a self-managed super fund?

Eyewatering bill facing Linda Reynolds revealed

Linda Reynolds will be forced to sell her three-bedroom home her costly defamation fight against Brittany Higgins. Now, legal experts have weighed in.

www.dailymail.co.uk

From reports if she was to lose she could owe up to 2 million in legal fees. (I had to sit down when reading this) Her home in WA is reported to be worth about $400 k less.
Could she have sold this house too in case she lost, and towards costs as well?
If Reynolds wins she could be up for half of the costs 1 mil from news reports.

 

[Zing13]

Ahhh yes I see it's ok for her to transfer assets to a trust.....

 

[Festerz]

Albrechtsen's obsession continues. Seemingly wanting us to ignore the fact that this is her friend Liberal Senator Linda Reynolds' defamation action and she (Reynolds) could have subpoenaed David Sharaz to appear, but didn't. Just as Bruce Lehrmann didn't subpoena Sharaz in HIS failed defamation action. Why not?

And no Janet - the real 'Where's Wally?' question relates to your other buddy - the disgraced Judge Wally Sofronoff, whose actions, including his multiple sessions with you, are the subject of an ACT Integrity Commission Inquiry. Do you still keep in regular contact with him at his Toowoomba residence?

 

[Ballarat Bob]

Sharaz has thrown up his hands and said he does not have the means to fight this case and isn't contesting it. If he's in France with Brittany he could well argue that he doesn't have to return to Australia and would prefer to spend the time with his pregnant partner.
I would imagine that Reynolds lawyers have considered that Sharaz has already provided them with enough evidence already and putting him on the stand could just muddy the waters.
The writing the book is actually an excellent idea , Reynolds could explain her side of the story and get it vetted by her legal team. There would be enough media coverage of it to get her point of view across publicly then it's back on Higgins and Sharaz to challenge it legally . Even is she self published it it would cost a fraction of what she's spending now , she gets to keep her home and hopefully everyone moves on in the world.
She's gone for the nuclear option and only getting totally vindicated with a massive payout will satisfy her. Even if that happens she will still be in the hole and will lose her house or have to refinance it. Just nuts.

 

[Kurve]

Sharaz has thrown up his hands and said he does not have the means to fight this case and isn't contesting it. If he's in France with Brittany he could well argue that he doesn't have to return to Australia and would prefer to spend the time with his pregnant partner.
I would imagine that Reynolds lawyers have considered that Sharaz has already provided them with enough evidence already and putting him on the stand could just muddy the waters.
The writing the book is actually an excellent idea , Reynolds could explain her side of the story and get it vetted by her legal team. There would be enough media coverage of it to get her point of view across publicly then it's back on Higgins and Sharaz to challenge it legally . Even is she self published it it would cost a fraction of what she's spending now , she gets to keep her home and hopefully everyone moves on in the world.
She's gone for the nuclear option and only getting totally vindicated with a massive payout will satisfy her. Even if that happens she will still be in the hole and will lose her house or have to refinance it. Just nuts.

So nuts it's a bit fishy imo.

Maybe there's some deal arrangement where the Liberal Party pays her back for any losses.

 

[Thats Ambitious]

Maybe Reynolds is shooting for her own settlement payment for an unsafe workplace?

I said that as a joke, but the more I think of it the more the evidence presented by Reynolds in this trial makes sense....

 

[Festerz]

Sharaz has thrown up his hands and said he does not have the means to fight this case and isn't contesting it. If he's in France with Brittany he could well argue that he doesn't have to return to Australia and would prefer to spend the time with his pregnant partner.

But the point is that Reynolds, just like Lehrmann before her , hasn't asked for a subpoena to get Sharaz to testify. And she has requested subpoenas for three rape survivors in this case, including one who is pregnant and one suffering from a chronic and debilitating health condition so I don't think him being out of the country or supporting his pregnant wife is the reason at all. Reynolds and her dodgy lawyer don't appear to me to be driven by concern for the issues of others- they appear to have subpoenaed everyone in the country EXCEPT David Sharaz FFS.

And his presence in France is not really an issue in any case because as Albrechtsen correctly points out, Sharaz could appear by video link if required.

His non appearance at the Lehrmann defamation trial was something that presiding Judge Lee expressed great surprise at given how central he was to claims being made in that trial, and I think his absence it is even more stunning in this case where he is a named defendant.

As expected, Albrechtsen claims the defence decision not to call Sharaz to give evidence in defence of his wife tells us something about the Higgins defence. That they and him are running scared.

But my point is that it is Reynolds who is bringing this action and she has named Sharaz as a co-conspirator with Ms Higgins. Her failure to call Sharaz to testify, even if he is not contesting the charge against himself, is the bigger issue here. Especially as, again quoting Albrechtsen - his words could have made things much worse for Ms Higgins and helped Reynolds' cause immensely.

Very, very odd. Like everything associated with this saga has been. The undercurrent of politics and dirty underhanded politicking would make excellent fodder for a future real life crime/politics drama series that would rival House of Cards (the trouble being no one living outside Australia would ever believe it ).

 

[Underarrest_]

So nuts it's a bit fishy imo.

Maybe there's some deal arrangement where the Liberal Party pays her back for any losses.

Could Reynolds think that she was singled out knowing what happened and actions taken before she was told?
I have thought about how things might have been different if an ambulance was called or at least someone from PH talked to her, asked her if she was ok, initially before she went home. It doesn’t mean B would have wanted to talk then but it might have been helpful in the sequence of how it was managed.
Brittany in her own words said that she went home, stayed in her room all weekend, crying. She then somehow went back into the place that she r*ped on Monday morning.
B from the start was treated like the woman who was just drunk, breached security and maybe had some fun.
Room was cleaned because it was not a thought that something else might have happened and so it goes on.
I find this unacceptable.

 

[BFew]

Like the defence says, how are these documents relevant to this defamation case, other than to remind everyone that Reynolds called one of her staff a lying cow?

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/last-minute-evidence-tendered-in-defamation-trial-between-senator-linda-reynolds-and-brittany-higgins/news-story/93f5d9c6e91a27889cb96a4db530dfa8

'Last minute evidence tendered in defamation trial between Senator Linda Reynolds and Brittany Higgins'​

...
August 28, 2024 - 7:05PM
...
Lawyers for Senator Linda Reynolds and Brittany Higgins have returned to the WA Supreme Court as the blockbuster defamation trial between the pair nears its end.

Last-minute evidence was tendered to the court on Wednesday, before both teams deliver closing statements next week.
....
Justice Tottle will make a decision overnight about whether documents subpoenaed from HBL Ebsworth Lawyers should be used as evidence.

Ebsworth were appointed for Senator Reynolds during Ms Higgins personal injury claim with the Commonwealth.

Mr Bennett argued Ebsworth had not informed the senator of anything during the settlement process, and the documents they subpoenaed showed Ms Higgins had relied on the lying cow comment.

He told the court it was breathtaking that they could rely on the comment when it had already been settled with the senator a year earlier.

He said the documents provided evidence that showed the legitimacy of Senator Reynolds fury and that she was justified to refer the matter to the National Anti-Corruption Commission.

Ms Young objected to the documents being submitted, saying they were irrelevant to these proceedings.
...'

 

[Kurve]

Maybe Reynolds is shooting for her own settlement payment for an unsafe workplace?

I said that as a joke, but the more I think of it the more the evidence presented by Reynolds in this trial makes sense....

I agree, it might appear this trial is part of a bigger scheme or a stepping stone?

 

[Mick F]

Could Reynolds think that she was singled out knowing what happened and actions taken before she was told?
I have thought about how things might have been different if an ambulance was called or at least someone from PH talked to her, asked her if she was ok, initially before she went home. It doesn’t mean B would have wanted to talk then but it might have been helpful in the sequence of how it was managed.
Brittany in her own words said that she went home, stayed in her room all weekend, crying. She then somehow went back into the place that she r*ped on Monday morning.
B from the start was treated like the woman who was just drunk, breached security and maybe had some fun.
Room was cleaned because it was not a thought that something else might have happened and so it goes on.
I find this unacceptable.

As would any half decent person (manager). Leaders are leaders -

The most disappointing aspect of this thread is decent people don’t appreciate the level of care …. supervisors, teachers, coaches, managers …. the privilege of developing and guiding people, within their sphere of influence. It is a duty you do not take lightly.

 

[Underarrest_]

As would any half decent person (manager). Leaders are leaders -

The most disappointing aspect of this thread is decent people don’t appreciate the level of care …. supervisors, teachers, coaches, managers are afforded …. the privilege of developing and guiding people, within their sphere of influence. It is a duty you do not take lightly.

Yes all hell should have broke loose.
Unfortunately a missed opportunity for a victim of a crime in the most vital time 48/72 hours after a rape mentally an physically. Have to ask if the policies were laid out on the table for anyone other than Brittany oh and the (alleged) rapist of course.

 

[big_e]

I saw it the other day, she started on $53K pa as a junior staffer if I'm not sure it had gone up by the time she started working for Reynolds. That's not a lot if you have to pay rent and maintain a polished appearance.

These aren't 38-hour-a-week jobs, by the way. Plenty of late nights, weekends, high-pressure situations - they're treated like dirt because there are plenty of people who want to work in politics and they get churned in and out pretty quickly.

 

[Festerz]

A reminder that, with standards of commercial media backed journalism falling rapidly (even within the publicly funded ABC) due to political and funding pressures, amateurs on social media platforms like twitter and Big Footy who have time on their hands, critical thinking skills, an understanding of law and judicial processes; and (most importantly) a commitment to honesty and fair play can play a vital role in keeping our justice system honest and accountable.

Like this guy...

 

[FIGJAM]

A reminder that, with standards of commercial media backed journalism falling rapidly (even within the publicly funded ABC) due to political and funding pressures, amateurs on social media platforms like twitter and Big Footy who have time on their hands, critical thinking skills, an understanding of law and judicial processes; and (most importantly) a commitment to honesty and fair play can play a vital role in keeping our justice system honest and accountable.

Like this guy...

Thank God that we have 'everyday heroes' like you and Schaefer holding the 'mainstream media' to account!

An irony is that you summarily dismissed Albrechtesen's article on the lack of transparency of this particular trial. You played the (wo)man, instead of the content of that article.

Albrechtson may well have been lamenting the lack of ammo from her extreme position; but it also prevents 'everyday heroes' like Schaefer, the Kangaroo Court of Australia and other opposing extremes from supporting their opinion.

Anyway, hopefully Rachael Young's mentioning of evidence from the Justice Lee trial is met with less ire from Tottle than the "critical thinkers" in this thread.