Lisa Wilkinson has unleashed over claims the Director of Public Prosecution Shane Drumgold issued a selected warning {that a} deliberate Logies speech might impression Bruce Lehrmann’s rape trial.
Nearly a 12 months after the trial was delayed for months over the fallout, Ms Wilkinson has advised an inquiry in a written submission an inaccurate account of her discussions with the DPP was offered to the ACT Supreme Court.
“If Mr Drumgold had told me not to give the speech, I would have followed that advice,’’ Ms Wilkinson said.
“If Mr Drumgold had told me that ‘publicity’ posed a risk to the trial, I would have further questioned that issue, especially given the publicity that had already occurred regarding the Logies, and the inherent publicity that could follow from the Logie award nomination irrespective of any speech given by me.”
Her attorneys submit Ms Wilkinson has suffered severe and ongoing reputational hurt because of the saga.
In a submission to the inquiry, they declare the furore that adopted contributed to her quitting as co-host on The Project amid “toxic” media protection.
Her lawyer Sue Chysthanhou SC stated Mr Drumgold gave an inaccurate account of his dialog on 15 June 2022 to Chief Justice Lucy McCallum.
“There was no specific warning given to Ms Wilkinson not to give a Logies speech,’’ the submission states.
“And thereafter his repeated failures (despite numerous requests on behalf of Ms Wilkinson) to correct the mistake of fact he caused McCallum CJ to proceed under in vacating the trial – despite subsequently acknowledging to Ms Wilkinson’s then-legal team that the mistake was not Ms Wilkinson’s – resulting in consistent and continued misreporting of his conversation with Ms Wilkinson, and significant harm to her reputation as a responsible journalist who deeply respects the judicial process.”
“Mr Drumgold did not warn Ms Wilkinson not to give a speech if The Project interview won, nor was Ms Wilkinson informed that she could not refer to Brittany Higgins in the speech,’’ the submission states.
“No one in that meeting, or subsequently, gave her any such warning.
“Chief Justice Lucy McCallum’s assessment that Ms Wilkinson was given a ‘clear and appropriate warning’ was factually inaccurate,” the submission states.
The submission states that the allegations made by Ms Higgins had been inherently a matter of public curiosity that attracted substantial media reporting.
“In making this respectful submission to the Inquiry, Ms Wilkinson wishes to ensure that in the ongoing interests of strong public interest journalism – the backbone upon which a strong, fair and democratic society is based – investigative journalists across the country should not be misrepresented by legal officers,’’ the submissions states.
“It was unfair to expect that Australia’s media would not continue to report issues surrounding workplace safety for women in parliamentary workplaces after Mr Lehrmann was charged. The fact of his charge was also inherently a matter of public interest, as was the conduct of his trial,’’ the submissions states.
“The conduct of Mr Drumgold in failing to publicly correct the record in relation to a submission made by him in Court in the matter of R v Lehrmann arises from and is incidental to the general conduct of the prosecution.
“Ms Wilkinson requests that it be investigated and reported on as part of this Inquiry.”
Her assertion stands in distinction to the proof that the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions, Shane Drumgold SC, who advised the ACT Supreme Court that if there was any publicity that it might trigger a delay to the trial.
Mr Drumgold admitted in his first day of proof on Monday that he ought to have offered a extra specific warning to Wilkinson.
“I would accept that I entirely misread the situation,” he stated.
“I thought this was somebody telling me they were up for an award for doing an interview … I was not, to my mind, dealing with the real issue.”
On Monday, Mr Drumgold was accused of constructing false statements to trial choose Chief Justice McCallum in a listening to final 12 months over Ms Wilkinson’s Logies speech.
Counsel helping Erin Longbottom KC accused Mr Drumgold of constructing a false assertion about his discussions with Ms Wilkinson.
“Those statements were false,” Ms Longbottom put to Mr Drumgold. “They were knowingly false.
The former Today show host was gagged from telling her story during the trial and the aftermath to avoid any suggestion that her comments might delay the trial again.
Last year ACT Supreme Court Judge Lucy McCallum slammed Ms Wilkinson and vacated the trial dates after accusing the media of having “obliterated the important distinction between an allegation that remains untested at law and one that has been accepted by a jury giving a true verdict according to the evidence.”
“Notwithstanding that clear and appropriate warning, upon receiving the award Ms Wilkinson gave a speech in which she openly referred to and praised the complainant in the present trial,” Chief Justice McCallum stated.
But her submission to the board of inquiry paints a really totally different story to that outlined within the ACT Supreme Court the place she was eviscerated over the speech and the fallout.
Ms Wilkinson met with the DPP Mr Drumgold on June 15, 2022 as a result of she was a Crown witness within the trial of Bruce Lehrmann.
“When I met with Mr Drumgold, I took with me a draft of the speech I had ready, as I needed to keep away from the chance that the speech might impression in any means on the scheduled prison trial in R v Lehrmann,’’ her submission states.
The Lehrmann trial was aborted in Canberra late final 12 months because of jury misconduct. The ACT DPP subsequently dropped the sexual assault cost. Mr Lehmann pleaded not responsible to the cost.
Originally revealed as Lisa Wilkinson unleashes over claims ACT chief prosecutor warned her that her Logies speech might derail Bruce Lehrmann rape trial
Source: www.dailytelegraph.com.au
