Updated Bruce Lehrmann Pt2 * Reynolds Defamation Trial Current

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #95
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
 
Last edited:
Festerz said:
I fully appreciate this has been a taxing time for Reynolds, often deeply unfair, even if she has not suffered anywhere near the same kind of trauma and public opprobrium as Higgins. But beyond the law, beyond the tit-for-tat of politics, you have to wonder if and when another kind of thinking might enter this equation: one of understanding why a young woman who has suffered a trauma might lash out at or resent those she perceived to have let her down. Whose mental health dipped wildly whilst waiting for some kind of resolution. Of allowing someone to make mistakes, to be human. Of giving the benefit of the doubt. Of not seeking more punishment for those who have already suffered.

In the public eye, the details long ago became blurred, and the ugliness of the whole escapade depressing. As a wise man once said, there reaches a point when it’s about “the vibe” of the thing. And the vibe here, on continuing litigation against a woman found to have been r*ped five years ago, who has had periods so black that she has been in and out of hospital repeatedly ever since, who has been forced to sell a house when pregnant with her first child is a bit … off.

This will be the case no matter the verdict. It just seems, sometimes, that the most important question is so often forgotten: “In the middle of all of this chaos, hurt, damage and muddle, what is the most decent thing to do?"
Click to expand...

I agree with this to a large degree and have voiced that Reynolds' current actions as idiotic from a long way back. She should have taken the Lee verdict as vindication of no cover-up and settled with Higgins and Sharaz to not keep posting stuff about her. A gimme putt for mine!

It is no doubt the 'decent' thing to have done and this trial is completely unnecessary. It is no doubt the politically (and financially!) smart thing to do even if you're not decent!

All that said the reason I have a more empathy for Reynolds than others (most sit at precisely zero!) is that were it just the bolded, then we can all agree that the "coulda, shoulda, woulda done better" story for a traumatised rape victim, then Reynolds coulda, shoulda, woulda left it there.

But then it was never just that. As Lee said, Higgins and Sharaz "crafted a narrative accusing others of putting up roadblocks and forcing her two years earlier of having to choose between her career and seeking justice by making and pursuing a complaint.". So when Reynolds is copping posts online from Sharaz and Higgins making claims of "bullying", it is through her lens a perpetuation of those false accusations.

Sharaz and Higgins conspiring as to who can get the most hits and cause the most damage isn't a good look. Higgins posting at the very start of the trial "How the law silences women" doesn't help her cause any either. All well and good telling Reynolds to leave Higgins alone, but it's fair to argue that the reverse should also be done.

Again, Reynolds should have taken the financial hit post-Lee verdict and hung her and Bruce's hat on that. Instead, she's gone back into the lion's den to get that Zampatti jacket and I'm quite confident that even if she gets some form of 'win', she'll probably still be down financially and she's already near the bottom in public opinion.
 
FIGJAM said:
But then it was never just that. As Lee said, Higgins and Sharaz "crafted a narrative accusing others of putting up roadblocks and forcing her two years earlier of having to choose between her career and seeking justice by making and pursuing a complaint.". So when Reynolds is copping posts online from Sharaz and Higgins making claims of "bullying", it is through her lens a perpetuation of those false accusations.
Click to expand...

Except this far in to the defamation trial, she's looking like a self interested, scheming bully.

We might dispense with Justice Lee's findings here imo, there's clearly new evidence he didn't see.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Kurve said:
Higgins is using a truth defence and you admit Reynolds looks like a bully ergo, if Higgins said she was a bully which I didn't read, she was probably telling the truth.
Click to expand...

It's imperative when analysing the credibility of either Higgins and Reynolds that it must be based solely on the evidence of their behaviour before the following dates:

Higgins: 29 May 2020

Reynolds: 15 February 2021

I would argue that both of them have acted extraordinarily differently after these moments in time.
 
Kurve said:
This far, Justice Lee has had zero input in to this particular defamation trial. For good reason I'd suggest.
Click to expand...
I'd love to see Justice Lee cross-examined by the defence in this defamation case.
 
FIGJAM said:
Are you both still referencing the claims from that LWNJ loser that Lee took a bribe by going to a News Ltd dinner?
Click to expand...
No.
I was more thinking it would be interesting to cross-examine Justice Lee as the final witness, on whether he would have come to a different decision what with the new evidence so far, and likely more still to come in the next few weeks.
 
BFew said:
No.
I was more thinking it would be interesting to cross-examine Justice Lee as the final witness, on whether he would have come to a different decision what with the new evidence so far, and likely more still to come in the next few weeks.
Click to expand...

What is the new evidence that would suggest a political cover up?
 
FIGJAM said:
What is the new evidence that would suggest a political cover up?
Click to expand...

Why isn't the Liberal Party suing Higgins for the suggestion instead of Reynolds?

If we're talking about Reynolds in a political cover up, there's evidence she was invested in discrediting Higgins and seeing Lehrmann found not guilty in her text messages with Whybrow, and in her selective text deletes.

Also looks like it's been proved now due to police and Brown's notes, that she suspected a sexual assault immediately when she saw the DPS Report.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kurve said:
If we're talking about Reynolds in a political cover up, there's evidence she was invested in discrediting Higgins and seeing Lehrmann found not guilty in her text messages with Whybrow, and in her selective text deletes.
Click to expand...

You need to refer to my relevant dates post above. They're important (ie. how is someone's actions after a false accusation evidence of the accusation that they are falsely accused of?).

I am glad that you do finally agree that selective text deletion indicates deceitful behaviour. Cuts both ways for Reynolds and Higgins here.

Kurve said:
Also looks like it's been proved now due to police and Brown's notes, that she suspected a sexual assault immediately when she saw the DPS Report.
Click to expand...

Reynolds hasn't ever been able to get her timeline correct and has always relied on Brown's notes. She can't even get things right after studying the notes before this trial. She's hopeless!

But of course they suspected that something 'may' have happened after the Thursday/2nd meeting, otherwise the discussion about getting the AFP involved. So what is new here?

Ghost Patrol said:
Regardless of the defamation result, I think we should design a Linda Reynolds badge for FIGJAM.
Click to expand...

Pass thanks man!

I think Reynolds is a bitch. I just don't think what happened to her or Brown is fair from Higgins and Sharaz. They literally lied about shit to get media buzz, a book deal, then went to the police as an afterthought, then curated data that obviously priced their narrative false and thereafter double and triple downed on their bullshit claims afterwards on socials.

I ain't pro-Reynolds; I'm anti Sharaggins!
 
FIGJAM said:
I am glad that you do finally agree that selective text deletion indicates deceitful behaviour. Cuts both Reynolds and Higgins here.
Click to expand...

Not really.

Making a direct comparison between a junior staffer rape victim in her early twenties to a senior lawmaker as Minister for Defence is silly imo.
 
FIGJAM said:
Reynolds hasn't ever been able to get her timeline correct and has always relied on Brown's notes. She can't even get things right after studying the notes before this trial. She's hopeless!

But of course they suspected that something 'may' have happened after the Thursday/2nd meeting, otherwise the discussion about getting the AFP involved. So what is new here?
Click to expand...

I'd never seen Brown's detailed notes of the argument she had with Reynolds and the SMOS before. I wasn't aware either of the notes police took when they first spoke to Reynolds and Brown. Were you?
 
Kurve said:
Not really.

Making a direct comparison between a junior staffer rape victim in her early twenties to a senior lawmaker as Minister for Defence is silly imo.
Click to expand...

Higgins post-Sharaz was in her later 20's and whilst she was and always will be a rape victim, she was and always will be, with Sharaz, the media manipulator who propogated the false narrative that she was forced to choose between her career and pursuing a rape claim by her employers.

I know for a fact that you have never read the verdict, Kurve. Did you know that Higgins deleted texts between her and Dillaway that started that she had zero interest in pursuing a criminal charge and the reasons why?

Then everything turned on its head after 29 May 2020. Do you know why?
 
FIGJAM said:
Higgins post-Sharaz was in her later 20's and whilst she was and always will be a rape victim, she was and always will be, with Sharaz, the media manipulator who propogated the false narrative that she was forced to choose between her career and pursuing a rape claim by her employers.

I know for a fact that you have never read the verdict, Kurve. Did you know that Higgins deleted texts between her and Dillaway that started that she had zero interest in pursuing a criminal charge and the reasons why?

Then everything turned on its head after 29 May 2020. Do you know why?
Click to expand...

Sharaz has already folded, it's Higgins Reynolds is gunning for and she's also using Higgins to drag Labor. I think it's an abuse of process.

So what if Higgins changed her mind about pursuing criminal charges and deleted those texts? The vast majority of rape victims internal and external dialogues swing all over the place, some for a very long time.

I've read bits and pieces of the verdict, I admit to not having studied it extensively and I'm not sure I have to. I might take more interest in the side issues of Lee's judgement should it be drawn on through this defamation trial.
 
Kurve said:
So what if Higgins changed her mind about pursuing criminal charges and deleted those texts? The vast majority of rape victims internal and external dialogues swing all over the place, some for a very long time.
Click to expand...

"So what"??

It is clear evidence that she lied about being pressured to choose between her job and a rape charge!!

Again, because you haven't read the verdict, you don't actually know that Higgins didn't change her mind about pursuing the rape charge. She always said to Dillway that she never had any intent of doing so. She even told the police this on multiple occassions.
 
Kurve said:
Why, in your view?
Click to expand...

That was when she met David Sharaz.

She went from someone who chose not to pursue criminal charges off her own bat, to accusing multiple previous employers of a cover-up. Lead by her professional media-advising partner to politicise the event. Lied when it suited her. Curated data to suit. Introduced dubious evidence that has been rubbished at two trials. Got a book deal up before even involving the police again.

Blind Freddy can see the turn here!
 
FIGJAM said:
That was when she met David Sharaz.

She went from someone who chose not to pursue criminal charges off her own bat, to accusing multiple previous employers of a cover-up. Lead by her professional media-advising partner to politicise the event. Lied when it suited her. Curated data to suit. Introduced dubious evidence that has been rubbished at two trials. Got a book deal up before even involving the police again.

Blind Freddy can see the turn here!
Click to expand...

Higgins was perfectly entitled to change her mind with her circumstances, and pursue rape charges, there's no statute of limitations.

Don't forget, that ultimately it was found that Higgins was r*ped.
 
Kurve said:
Higgins was perfectly entitled to change her mind with her circumstances, and pursue rape charges, there's no statute of limitations.
Click to expand...

150,000,000% she is entitled to change her mind, go to the police and pursue criminal charges! Who has ever said otherwise?!

The issue is though, is that 'changing her mind pursuing rape charges' isn't what happened. What happened was:

  • Inside The Canberra Bubble aired in November 2020;
  • Grace Tame named Australian of the Year in December 2020;
  • David Sharaz, experienced political media advisor, seeks to capitalise on this sentiment setting up media meetings in January 2021;
  • Higgins recorded the interview with Wilkinson 2 February 2021;
  • As a part of this interview, there was a sudden internal realisation that they kinda needed a live criminal investigation and then Higgins went to the police 4 February 2021 as an afterthought to the media campaign;
  • 15 February 2021 both media articles were published and they both had the major motif of "explosive allegations" of a junior staffer being "forced to choose between reporting it to the police or keeping her job";
  • During the criminal investigation, The lead investigator Superintendent Moller described Ms Higgins as "evasive", "uncooperative" and "manipulative". That she lied about medical appointments, refused to hand over her phone and when she did hand over her phone, she had deleted data directly relevant to the case. That Higgins seemed "more preoccupied with media appearances than progressing the investigation";
  • Moller recommended not pursuing the case due to credibility issues, before being overruled by Drumgold;
  • During the criminal trial, in addition to the aforementioned exploitable credibility issues, it became evident through contemporaneous records, that Higgins wasn't "forced to choose between reporting it to the police or keeping her job" as the media articles suggested, with those accused of this literally taking her to the police and Higgins affirming in deleted texts to Dillaway that she had no interest in pursuing a charge;
  • All of the above credibility issues were seized upon by Lehrmann's lawyers and the jury got stuck, before infamously abandoning the criminal trial without a result and we will never see a criminal conviction.

Kurve said:
Don't forget, that ultimately it was found that Higgins was r*ped.
Click to expand...

Yep! I agree with Lee's findings 100%.

The issue is though that as a result of Higgins and Sharaz's 'media first' approach, a reluctance to deal with the police and the curation of data that proved her claims of a political cover-up to be false, they significantly negatively impacted the chance of success in the criminal trial.

Without the aforementioned noise and false claims, I reckon Higgins would have stood a pretty good chance of getting a conviction, even without any medical reports.

One silver lining is the fact that Bruce got screen time enough for the Toowoomba alleged victim come forward, who has done everything by the book and if he's convicted, hopefully they slap him with a maximum gaol term. Otherwise his entire punishment will be 3 years and 1 day in financial gaol for pissing $10 mill of Network 10's money up the wall and he's broke anyway, so how's that even a punishment?!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Updated Bruce Lehrmann Pt2 * Reynolds Defamation Trial Current

Similar threads

Kurve
Current 'Just the greatest groomer' Senior Sergeant Paul Reynolds - Tas
Replies
2
Views
605
Kurve
Kurve
Kurve
Current Met Police Crimes - London * 1,000 officers currently suspended
Replies
9
Views
1K
Kurve
Kurve

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top