When a younger former authorities worker mentioned on nationwide tv in 2021 that she had been sexually assaulted in Australia’s Parliament two years earlier, it shocked the nation and unleashed a wave of anger aimed on the nation’s insular, male-dominated political institution.
The worker, Brittany Higgins, accused her colleague Bruce Lehrmann of raping her when she was inebriated, and mentioned that she felt stress from the federal government on the time to not report the assault. She grew to become a figurehead for a looking on ladies’s rights that finally contributed to the electoral ousting of Australia’s conservative nationwide authorities. However for years, there was no authorized conclusion to the case.
On Monday, it was lastly — considerably — settled, in a roundabout manner.
Mr. Lehrmann misplaced a civil defamation go well with that he had filed towards the tv station that first broadcast Ms. Higgins’s account, with the choose ruling that based mostly on the out there proof, it was extra probably than not that Mr. Lehrmann had raped her.
The proceedings didn’t happen in a felony courtroom, and the offense didn’t need to be confirmed past an inexpensive doubt. As an alternative, the usual of proof was a steadiness of possibilities — a authorized time period that means whether or not one thing is extra probably than to not have occurred.
Nonetheless, for a lot of, this was a long-awaited validation for Ms. Higgins.
“One thing resembling justice has been performed,” mentioned Sarah Maddison, a political science professor on the College of Melbourne.
Justice Michael Lee of the Australian Federal Courtroom in Sydney decided on Monday that it was extra probably than not that Ms. Higgins had been inebriated, unaware of her environment, and mendacity nonetheless “like a log” whereas Mr. Lehrmann assaulted her. The choose discovered that Mr. Lehrmann had been “hellbent” on having intercourse along with her, disregarding whether or not she had the capability to consent.
“In his pursuit of gratification, he didn’t care a method or one other whether or not Ms. Higgins understood or agreed to what was occurring,” Justice Lee mentioned in his ruling.
The choose added that though he believed Ms. Higgins had overstated the extent to which the federal government had tried to cowl up the incident, her account of the assault itself was plausible. The choose additionally mentioned that nothing Mr. Lehrmann had mentioned must be accepted as reality with out corroboration from different sources.
Professor Maddison mentioned the case illustrated the considerations that many ladies have about the best way sexual assault allegations are handled by Australia’s justice system, together with the cruel scrutiny that accusers are sometimes subjected to.
In 2022, throughout a felony trial in regards to the case, Ms. Higgins sat via days of intense cross-examination by protection attorneys who prompt that she didn’t really bear in mind what had occurred, and who accused her of creating up the accusation. She denied that repeatedly, typically defiantly and typically in tears.
That felony trial led to a mistrial after a juror went towards the choose’s directions and introduced analysis on sexual assault instances into the jury room. However prosecutors determined towards a retrial due to considerations about Ms. Higgins’s psychological well being.
Mr. Lehrmann then sued Community Ten and Lisa Wilkinson, the journalist who was the primary to interview Ms. Higgins on tv, for defamation.
“Having escaped the lions’ den, Mr. Lehrmann made the error of going again for his hat,” Justice Lee mentioned.
After Monday’s verdict, Ms. Wilkinson instructed reporters: “I really feel glad for the ladies of Australia right now.” Mr. Lehrmann and Ms. Higgins didn’t instantly reply to requests for remark made via their attorneys.
Rachael Burgin, a senior lecturer in criminology on the Swinburne College of Know-how in Melbourne, mentioned the result of the defamation trial, in a manner, was nonetheless unsatisfactory.
Mr. Lehrmann suffered few penalties, she mentioned, whereas Ms. Higgins “needed to undergo a hell of rather a lot to get right here, and she or he doesn’t get rather a lot out of it when it comes to justice.”
