Bruce Lehrman was not guilty but the Federal government was?


The litigation stemming from the accusation of rape levelled at Bruce Lehrman by Brittany Higgins is still very much ongoing  but I think a major anomaly in the matter needs to be highlighted

Allegations of rape do not normally go to trial unless the  police foresee a substantial probability of a conviction resulting.  The police did not see sufficient grounds to proceed  in the case of the Higgins allegations.  But as a result of political pressure, an attempt was made to prosecute Lehrman.  So the evidence for the allegation was weak from the beginning. The prosecution failed without a verdict being rendered so Lehrman continued to benefit from an assumption of innocence.

In the absence of a guilty verdict in the matter, one would have thought that all possibilty of a damages claim would be lost.  There is nothing that you could sue Bruce Lehrman for.  So how could Higgins get a payout for her allegations?  How could she get a payout for something that did not happen?

She did get a payout and she did so by suing the government.  Apparently, the government could be guilty even if the respondent in the rape claim was not.  

That is a very strange set of circumstances.    How could the government be guilty when the alleged rape at the centre of the matter had not been proven to take place?  

But the government was simply a much softer touch.  They did not ask for evidence of anything.  An accusation alone was enough for them to throw taxpayer money at Ms Higgins without further enquiry.

And note that the payout was broken down so that only a small amount was for legal expenses.  Most of the payment was for  losses and damages alleged suffered by Higgins, something for which we have her word only.

So the payout was clearly an abuse of justice.  If a mere accusation is enough to inspire a government payout, why do we have courts at all?


The Albanese government paid Brittany Higgins more than $2.4m compensation in a settlement that relied entirely upon the ­former Liberal staffer’s version of events, despite contrary versions from key witnesses who were excluded from a single-day mediation of her claim.

Lawyers described both the amount and the speed of the settlement – finalised just days after Bruce Lehrmann’s rape trial was abandoned in the ACT ­Supreme Court – as “extraordinary” and “unprecedented”.

The deed of settlement ­between Ms Higgins and the ­commonwealth was released on Thursday in the defamation trial brought by Bruce Lehrmann against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson over Ms Higgins’ ­allegation on The Project that she was raped by him in Parliament House in 2019, after her lawyers successfully asked that personal medical information be excluded.

Justice Michael Lee, presiding over the trial, had earlier stated there was “a disparity between the evidence (Ms Higgins) gave in these proceedings and the truth of the matter”, which made the settlement deed “substantially ­relevant”.

The document shows that the commonwealth did not admit it had breached its duty of care to Ms Higgins when it paid her the multimillion-dollar settlement, contrary to claims she made to the court earlier this week.

The document reveals that the federal government ensured it was released from any future claims by Ms Higgins but left former Liberal ministers Linda Reynolds and Michaelia Cash open to further legal action by the former staffer, a carve-out clause that was not fully communicated to either of the two senators.

Ms Higgins testified on Tuesday that “the commonwealth ­admitted that they breached their duty of care and that they didn’t go through proper processes, so that’s actually why they ­settled with me”.

However, the deed of settlement – dated December 13, 2022 – expressly states that the parties have agreed to resolve all claims between them “without any ­admissions of liability”.

The one-day mediation took place 10 days after ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane ­Drumgold announced he would not be proceeding with a retrial of rape charges against Mr Lehrmann due to Ms Higgins’ fragile mental health.

The deed shows that the total amount paid to Ms Higgins was $2.445m, not $2.3m as the former staffer stated in the Federal Court on Tuesday.

Ms Higgins received $1.48m for loss of earning capacity for 40 years; $400,000 for hurt, distress and humiliation; $220,000 for medical expenses; $100,000 for “past and future domestic assistance”; and $245,000 for legal costs.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/brittany-higgins-bombshell-24m-payout-based-entirely-on-her-own-evidence/news-story/d8859eccb1e350da7e6f9117590497de

************************************************
s.

No comments:

Post a Comment

All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them