Parliament House sexual assault and harassment allegations

[think positive]

[David]

<Discussion of modération moved here: https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=92032

Thanks, David for BBMods.>

[Jezza]

[What'sinaname]

If I was representing Mr Lehrmann, I'd tell him to go underground and not say anything or been seen anywhere. The media unpicking the text messages are doing more for him than he could.

[think positive]

That’s what I thought!

If I was on the jury and read those texts I’d have reasonable doubt

[David]

What are the most damning texts, exactly? I've seen a few that have suggested possible collusion with a Labor MP in getting the story out – which does indicate political weaponisation – but none of them seem to have any bearing on the actual facts of the case.

[think positive]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12169427/Brittany-Higgins-text-messages-reveal-secret-plot-enlist-Anthony-Albanese-senior-Labor-MPs.html

[stui magpie]

The key allegation isn't political weaponisation by Labor, something any politician would do given a chance, but the fact that Gallagher was asked in the Senate if she knew about the story before the interview came out and said No. The texts suggest she lied and deliberately midlead the Senate.

[David]

Right – but that reflects mostly on her credibility, not necessarily that of Higgins, doesn't it?

I'm not sure I fully understand why Higgins and her partner would have sought to involve Labor politicians in this (presumably in the knowledge that her story would thus be used for political capital), but I also don't know what it's like to go public with allegations of being raped and what sort of protections you'd want in place before doing so.

As someone who doesn't have a particular dog in this fight or any biases towards either side (I believe in both justice for victims and presumption of innocence for the accused), my natural sympathies still lie with the woman who's saying she was assaulted unless there were compelling indications to suggest she's lying. And the question of whether or not she was raped seems a far weightier one than how she decided to air the story two years on from the night in question.

[watt price tully]

Nothing to see here. This is a Murdoch beat up as per usual.

Lets get a few facts right shall we:

A Liberal party Employee alleges she was raped in a liberal party minsters office by a Liberal Party staff member and colleague.

The Liberal party sacked the complainant.

The Liberal party held their own investigation under the mendacious Morrison government and have not made those findings public (who knew what and when)

The trial was aborted due to a friggin' idiot of a juror

Defamation proceedings occurred however when the alleged Liberal party male perpetrator had his chance to state his viewpoint in court he did not he chose to end those particular proceedings he would have had to be cross examined so he conveniently avoided that)

Other defamation proceedings remain

The alleged Liberal party male perpetrator was interviewed on Channel 7 in a fluff piece to give his point of view & was not challenged.

Release of texts by the commercial media (hello police, hello news media ) & in parallel with the hen minster Reynolds make insinuation & accusations that this is a conspiracy & Katy Gallagher lied to parliament.


At the Labor women’s conference in Perth on Saturday, Gallagher said she was “aware of some allegations in the days leading up to the choice of Ms Brittany Higgins to make those allegations public” but “did not mislead the parliament”.

“I was responding to an assertion that was being made by minister Reynolds at the time that we had known about this for weeks and had made a decision to weaponise it,” she said.

“That is not true, it was never true.

“Mr Sharaz provided me with information … I did nothing with that information. And I was clear about that at the time. So some two years ago, when I spoke with senator Linda Reynolds about it, I said to her exactly that. That I had been made aware. I wasn’t aware of the full allegations that were made public when the interviews went to air.”

Pressed on what, exactly, she was aware of, Gallagher said she was aware “that there was going to be some public reporting that a young woman [was] making serious allegations about events that had occurred in a minister’s office [and they] were going to become public”.

“I was given some information, I did nothing with that information. I was clear about that with Senator Reynolds when she raised the issue in the committee,” she said.

“When she raised it, I explained what had happened but I categorically rejected … the assertion she was putting, which was that we had chosen to weaponise that information weeks ahead of being told about it.”

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/10/katy-gallagher-denies-misleading-parliament-over-knowledge-of-brittany-higgins-allegation

This is mostly a liberal party issue. She was allegedly raped by a liberal party staffer, she was a liberal party staffer and it occurred in a then liberal party minsters office.

The Liberal party still have not revealed the outcome of their inquiry. It also happened as part of the wider issue of the liberal party has with women & continues to have with the women.

Deflection by the Liberals and their fellow nutters of the crazy right wing press won't work.

[stui magpie]

[think positive]

Exactly Stu

[swoop42]

I believe Ms.Higgins was raped.

I also believe that the type of personality who is attracted to becoming a staffer for the Liberal Party is also someone seduced by money, power and influence so it comes as no surprise she would seek to extract revenge in the media and gain financially if she couldn't do it in a court of law.

Personally I think the Liberal Party would want to be very careful because the question of who knew what and when regarding her allegations prior to the election before last is of far more interest and potentially damaging.

We've already heard of allegations of interference with the police investigation (from the DPP no less) as well as other instances like the husband of Senator Reynolds attending the trial during the testimony of Ms Higgins.

Then of course are the actions of the Senator herself throughout this entire ordeal with allegations ranging from her calling Ms.Higgins a lying cow upon initially hearing the accusations to aiding the defence at trial.

Personally I think Ms.Higgins initially stayed silent or was persuaded to for the good of the party (which in of itself could be seen as a reflection of character) but once she felt she was being ostracized and not rewarded for her discretion she decided to speak out publicly.

At the end of the day if you believe like myself that she was raped then it's understandable that the trauma and rage she felt was always going to explode in some manner given the high stakes environment it occurred in.

[roar]

We can "believe" any scenario but how can anything be proved?

[stui magpie]

@WPT, do try to get some facts straight.