Linda Reynolds vs Brittany Higgins: Defence lawyers label Senator’s evidence as ‘problematic, self-serving’

[Pelican Press 0]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Linda Reynolds vs Brittany Higgins: Defence lawyers label Senator’s evidence as ‘problematic, self-serving’

Lawyers for Brittany Higgins have labelled the defamation claim against her by her former boss Linda Reynolds as “meritless” — and say the case has instead shown the Senator as an “unreliable witness” who harassed her junior former staff member after she alleged *****.

As the blockbuster defamation claim against Ms Higgins by the former Defence Minister edges towards the end, Rachael Young SC began her closing arguments on behalf of the former staffer.

As the closings began, Ms Young opened up on the outgoing WA Senator, saying the evidence given by her during the five-week trial was at times non-responsive and gratuitous.

She called the Senator’s recall about key matters “problematic, unreliable, and … self-serving”.

And she also detailed how Ms Higgins was harassed by her former boss over years – beginning with her calling Ms Higgins a “lying cow” in front of her staff as The Project was going to air.

“The senator engaged in a course of persistent activities against Miss Higgins that is engaging in a campaign of harassment,” Ms Young said.

“First by calling her a lying cow, which was then … disseminated widely. Two, by repeatedly backgrounding a journalist by giving her confidential and privileged communications, and by giving public interviews, undermining Ms Higgins.

“And thirdly, by engaging in partisan conduct during the ********* trial of Mr Lehrmann.”

A key part of that campaign, Ms Young said, was the questioning and criticism of the settlement Ms Higgins received from the government.

“Questioning Miss Higgins’ settlement publicly through the media, was harassment of Miss Higgins,” she said.

By it, the senator contributed to the public claims and questions raised about whether Miss Higgins ought to have received a settlement at all, or the settlement of the size that she received.

“We say both objectively and subjectively, this is harassment.

“This conduct does not reflect well on the Senator, and importantly — it revealed a ******* to publicly harass Ms Higgins by the provision of confidential information.”

She told WA’s Supreme Court that Ms Reynolds’ case was aimed at the wrong target and was attempting to gain damages by a “side wind” — for impacts on her that occurred years before the publications sued upon.

“The heaviest burden has and will continue to be carried by Ms Higgins — the survivor of a serious ****** which has affected every aspect of her life, including serious impacts on her mental health,” Ms Young said.

“(So) why are we here?

“The parties are here because Senator Reynolds, feeling distress and upset by the political accountability placed on her … seeks by a side wind to claim damages, following publications made two years later.

“And in that process, besmirched those whom she blames for her political demise.

“Her own evidence — corroborated by her witnesses — demonstrates that the hurt, distress and health issues in 2021 have no relationship with Ms Higgins’ 2023 publications.”

In developing her closings, Ms Young said Ms Higgins’ motive for revealing her ***** allegation on The Project in 2021 was “for an altruistic purpose”.

“To ensure that there would be a focus on systemic failings at Parliament House, including the lack of human resources, the way her ***** was handled, the lack of follow-up, and the fact that no one had checked in with her about seeing a counsellor,” Ms Young said.

Camera IconBrittany Higgins outside of court. Credit: TheWest

Now, Ms Young said the Senator was instead alleging “a sinister and gratuitous motive”.

“She boldly says that the 2023 publications were actuated by malice … that Ms Higgins, together with Mr Shiraz, planned to in effect ******** the Senator and bring down the Morrison government by weaponising (her) ***** allegation.

“We say the Senator faces a significant problem in recovering any damages

“We say it would be inappropriate and irrational to compensate the Senator for hurt, distress and health issues that in effect, arose two years before Ms Higgins even published the impugned publications.”

 IconReynolds vs Higgins. Senator Linda Reynolds arriving at DMJC. Credit: Ian Munro/The West ***********

Ms Higgins is being sued by the Senator over a series of social media posts that she believes damaged her reputation.

More than 20 witnesses including former prime minister Scott Morrison have given evidence in the WA Supreme Court trial.

The senator alleges Ms Higgins and her now-husband David Sharaz cast her as the “villain” in their “political cover-up ****** tale” that included accusations of ill-treatment, ostracism, bullying, harassment and threatening conduct.

Ms Higgins’ lawyer Rachael Young told the trial her client was courageous in 2021 when she spoke up about her alleged ***** and workplace culture two years earlier at Parliament House.

She ridiculed the claim Ms Higgins was targeting the senator in a bid to harm her when she spoke to journalists Lisa Wilkinson on Network Ten’s The Project and Samantha Maiden from News Corp about the alleged mishandling of the incident.

Mr Morrison told the court he feared Senator Reynolds would **** amid the political firestorm that followed.

“It was the weaponising of this issue for political purposes to discredit both Senator Reynolds … and the government and, by extension, myself,” he said.

Senator Reynolds’ parents, Janice and Laith Reynolds, said their daughter was “badly affected by going from a person who was universally loved and respected to becoming a pariah”.

“She was accused of being some kind of monster who deserted a poor young woman who had been ******,” Mrs Reynolds said in a witness statement.

 IconMartin Bennett lawyer for Linda Reynolds arives at court. Credit: Andrew Ritchie/The West Austalian

Senator Reynolds claims her suffering has been compounded by Ms Higgins’ social media posts which she says carry imputations that she harassed her former staffer, mishandled her alleged *****, wants to silence ******* ******** victims and engaged in questionable conduct during Lehrmann’s aborted ********* trial.

Ms Higgins relies on the defence of truth to justify her harassment claim, with Ms Young reminding the court of the senator’s “disgraceful slur” when she called the former staffer a “lying cow” in front of parliamentary staff.

She also pointed to Senator Reynolds’ conduct during Lehrmann’s trial and said she backgrounded media about Ms Higgins.

The same defence is being employed for Ms Higgins’ ***** mishandling accusation, with Ms Young telling the court the senator withheld information from the former staffer but shared it with others, and provided inadequate counselling and work options.

The defence also relies on qualified privilege, fair comment and honest opinion and says Ms Higgins was reacting to and speaking about issues of public interest.

Ms Higgins, who is pregnant, was expected to testify but late in the trial, Ms Young told the court she could win the case without doing so, while also raising concerns about her client’s medical condition.

with AAP

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

#Linda #Reynolds #Brittany #Higgins #Defence #lawyers #label #Senators #evidence #problematic #selfserving

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up