Bruce Lehrmann defamation trial live: Lisa Wilkinson denies suggestion in court she ‘coached’ Brittany Higgins before The Project interview

What we’ve heard so far today

Today in the witness box the court has heard evidence from Ten journalist Lisa Wilkinson, going into details of her investigation and reporting of Brittany Higgins’ claims.

Bruce Lehrmann is suing Network Ten and Wilkinson for defamation over an interview with Higgins broadcast on The Project and online, which did not name him but alleged she had been raped by a Liberal staffer in 2019.

Lehrmann has denied raping Higgins and pleaded not guilty to a charge of sexual intercourse without consent. His criminal trial was abandoned due to juror misconduct and the second did not proceed due to prosecutors’ fears for Higgins’ mental health.

Here’s what we’ve heard:

The court was played Wilkinson’s Logies victory speech, made weeks before Lehrmann’s criminal trial. She denied a suggestion by Lehrmann’s lawyer, Matthew Richardson SC, that she had put her “pride and ego” ahead of his client’s right to a fair trial. “I completely disagree,” Wilkinson said.

The judge, Justice Michael Lee, asked if that speech, and its reference to Higgins’ “unwavering courage”, implied that Wilkinson believed Higgins was telling the truth about her alleged rape. Wilkinson agreed that a woman would not be demonstrating unwavering courage if they were making a false allegation.

Wilkinson explained that she didn’t think to investigate the metadata on a photograph of a bruise on Higgins’ leg because she “didn’t know what metadata was”. She said she didn’t ask for specific details about the bruise because conversations with survivors of sexual assault are “very difficult”. And she agreed some aspects of Higgins’ story about her mobile phone had raised “alarm bells”.

Wilkinson denied being “entirely captured” by her source, Higgins and the “riveting commercial appeal” of her story. “Don’t make me sound like a cheap tabloid journalist,” Wilkinson retorted.

Wilkinson explained why she believed there was “damage control” and an effort to keep the Higgins story “under wraps” within the prime minister’s office.

She denied that Higgins’ account was unreliable or inconsistent, saying she was “attuned to reading between the lines”.

The hearing is due to resume at 2:15pm.

Updated at 22.09 EST

Key events

Wilkinson denies ‘coaching’ Higgins during pre-interview

Wilkinson has denied a suggestion from Lehrmann’s barrister that she was “coaching” Higgins before the interview and that it was “inappropriate conduct for a journalist”.

Richardson took Wilkinson to the transcript of a pre-interview with Higgins where she said to her she didn’t want “to put words in your mouth” but on camera she should talk about the culture of Parliament House.

Richardson:

You knew that Ms Higgins didn’t have a convincing explanation for why she hadn’t pressed charges in 2019 that it could affect her credibility?

Wilkinson:

Apart from everything else, I needed to understand why she hadn’t proceeded with a police investigation so that that could be communicated to our audience.

Updated at 00.12 EST

Wilkinson asked to identify “roadblocks” to police investigation in broadcast script

Wilkinson has been asked to identify in the script of the broadcast what the “roadblocks to the police investigation” were.

She has identified that one barrier was that there was no human resources department in Parliament House and another was that the AFP in Parliament House was an “inappropriate place” for Brown to take Higgins to report her alleged rape.

Wilkinson said another roadblock was that the “first person she spoke to was a political adviser who was not trained in taking the statement of a young woman who was alleging she had been sexually assaulted”.

Lehrmann’s barrister, Matthew Richardson SC, put to Wilkinson that the roadblocks she had identified were both before the police investigation had begun.

Wilkinson has been warned by Lee to “not worry about engaging in speeches” and just give her “shortest, truthful answer”.

Updated at 23.25 EST

Wilkinson: ‘I feel we investigated this story extremely well’

The court has returned from lunch, and Wilkinson is being cross-examined about the apparent contradiction between her belief there had been a systemic cover up by the government, and statements by Reynolds and Brown that they would support Higgins if she went to police.

Justice Lee intervened to ask: “Do you think it’s consistent with the ‘systemic cover-up of a rape allegation’ for someone to escort someone to an AFP office?”

Lee was referring to the day Brown escorted Higgins to the AFP office in the basement of Parliament House.

Wilkinson did not answer the question directly but said the AFP officers were not trained in dealing with sexual assault victims and were the wrong people to take Higgins to.

Richardson: “Did you think to ask [Higgins] if she was being told, ‘we will support you’, what it was that made her come to believe that going to the police was not feasible?”

Wilkinson: “The pressure she was feeling.”

Richardson: “Did you think to ask her what was actually causing the pressure? Did you see that as a potential problem with her allegation?”

Wilkinson: “No, I didn’t.”

Richardson: “[Was it] something that warranted further investigation Ms Wilkinson??

Wilkinson: “I feel we investigated this story extremely well Mr Richardson.”

Updated at 23.07 EST

What we’ve heard so far today

Today in the witness box the court has heard evidence from Ten journalist Lisa Wilkinson, going into details of her investigation and reporting of Brittany Higgins’ claims.

Bruce Lehrmann is suing Network Ten and Wilkinson for defamation over an interview with Higgins broadcast on The Project and online, which did not name him but alleged she had been raped by a Liberal staffer in 2019.

Lehrmann has denied raping Higgins and pleaded not guilty to a charge of sexual intercourse without consent. His criminal trial was abandoned due to juror misconduct and the second did not proceed due to prosecutors’ fears for Higgins’ mental health.

Here’s what we’ve heard:

The court was played Wilkinson’s Logies victory speech, made weeks before Lehrmann’s criminal trial. She denied a suggestion by Lehrmann’s lawyer, Matthew Richardson SC, that she had put her “pride and ego” ahead of his client’s right to a fair trial. “I completely disagree,” Wilkinson said.

The judge, Justice Michael Lee, asked if that speech, and its reference to Higgins’ “unwavering courage”, implied that Wilkinson believed Higgins was telling the truth about her alleged rape. Wilkinson agreed that a woman would not be demonstrating unwavering courage if they were making a false allegation.

Wilkinson explained that she didn’t think to investigate the metadata on a photograph of a bruise on Higgins’ leg because she “didn’t know what metadata was”. She said she didn’t ask for specific details about the bruise because conversations with survivors of sexual assault are “very difficult”. And she agreed some aspects of Higgins’ story about her mobile phone had raised “alarm bells”.

Wilkinson denied being “entirely captured” by her source, Higgins and the “riveting commercial appeal” of her story. “Don’t make me sound like a cheap tabloid journalist,” Wilkinson retorted.

Wilkinson explained why she believed there was “damage control” and an effort to keep the Higgins story “under wraps” within the prime minister’s office.

She denied that Higgins’ account was unreliable or inconsistent, saying she was “attuned to reading between the lines”.

The hearing is due to resume at 2:15pm.

Updated at 22.09 EST

Wilkinson says she believed Fiona Brown and Linda Reynolds ‘would have been taking a lot of direction’ from PM’s office

Before the lunch break, Justice Michael Lee asked Wilkinson: “I’m trying to get to your understanding [at] the time the program was broadcast … you had the view, didn’t you, that Ms Brown and Senator Reynolds were involved in a systemic cover-up, or not? Were they participants in the systemic cover-up or not?”

Wilkinson: “I believe that they [were being] very, very careful in the lead up to a tightly contested election, and that they would have been taking a lot of direction from the prime minister’s office.”

The court has adjourned until 2.15pm.

Updated at 22.24 EST

Wilkinson denies Brittany Higgins’ account was unreliable

Wilkinson denies that Higgins’ account was unreliable or that there were inconsistencies in what Higgins said at different times about the conduct of Reynolds and Brown in handling her rape allegation.

Richardson said in Higgins’ timeline, Reynolds and Brown indicated they would be supportive if she went to police.

Wilkinson explained that she is “attuned to reading between the lines” so was not concerned about Higgins’ version of how she was treated by the Liberal party.

Wilkinson explained that Higgins may have been perceiving Reynolds’ and Brown’s words differently because of the political environment.

She said in Parliament House there were “so many people with so many agendas, and so many people scared of losing power”.

Richardson asked Wilkinson if she believed it was a “serious problem” that “the words that were actually said [by Reynolds and Brown] were different to what Ms Higgins was relaying to you”.

Wilkinson: “No … Maybe I’m just attuned to reading between the lines even more than you are, Mr Richardson.”

Updated at 23.08 EST

Wilkinson ‘reading between the lines’ over whether Higgins thought her job at risk

Wilkinson has said she was “reading between the lines” when she thought Higgins had to choose between staying in her job and making a criminal complaint of sexual assault.

“Again, we moved from the vagaries of primetime television to the vagaries of politics, Mr Richardson,” she said to Lehrmann’s lawyer.

I think that the words that were being said were possibly different to the way they were being perceived by a young, frightened political staffer, who understood that if she remained a team player and didn’t proceed with any kind of police report, she would be seen as a good soldier because she’d stayed silent.

Richardson:

What you’re doing, Ms Wilkinson, is drawing a distinction between what you believe Ms Higgins felt and what was actually said to her. Is that correct?

Wilkinson:

Yeah, I’m reading between the lines. That’s what we tend to do as journalists, to try and understand when you’re interviewing somebody.

Updated at 00.13 EST

Primetime TV viewers’ ‘short attention span’ behind decision to show only part of Fiona Brown’s message to Higgins, Wilkinson says

Wilkinson said primetime television viewers have a “short attention span” when she was asked why only part of a message from Higgins’ boss Fiona Brown was shown on the program.

Unfortunately, Mr Richardson, the vagaries of primetime television mean that there’s a fairly short attention span that viewers have for very, very long messages. So, this was just about the confirmation around Linda Reynolds wanting to catch up with Ms Higgins and organising a meeting.

Richardson asked why a part of the message, which said Higgins could bring her father to a meeting with Reynolds and Brown, was not shown.

Wilkinson said it was a “very quick screen grab [and] wasn’t relevant for viewers”.

Updated at 00.13 EST

Wilkinson says she believed PM’s office was doing a ‘lot of damage control’

Wilkinson said she believed there was a “lot of damage control going on within the prime minister’s office to keep this whole thing under wraps”.

Richardson asked what the basis was for her thinking there was a systemic cover-up.

Wilkinson: “When within days, two of the most senior advisers to prime minister Scott Morrison turned up in the office, you know that damage control is going on.

“Also the fact that she was just a junior staffer, and she was getting calls from senior members of Scott Morrison’s office on politically sensitive days for the Liberal party … checking in to make sure she’s OK.”

Updated at 23.38 EST

Wilkinson denies she had ‘no intention of challenging’ Brittany Higgins

Wilkinson has denied she was “entirely captured” by her source, Higgins, and had no intention of challenging her.

The suggestion by Richardson came after the court heard Wilkinson sent Higgins a text after her interview saying she “did something truly magnificent today”.

“Thank you for trusting us,” the text said. “I promise that we are going to do everything in our power to ensure that this will bring change, please be incredibly proud.”

Richardson: “Ms Wilkinson, I want to suggest to you that you were completely committed to supporting Ms Higgins. You had no intention of challenging her on anything she said.”

Wilkinson: “I totally disagree.”

Richardson: “You had no desire to check or scrutinise anything she said.”

Wilkinson: “I totally disagree.”

Richardson: “You were entirely captured by your source. Weren’t you? You were thrilled by the riveting commercial appeal of the story that she told.”

Wilkinson: “Don’t make me sound like a cheap tabloid journalist, Mr Richardson.”

Updated at 23.38 EST

And here is Bruce Lehrmann arriving at court today with his legal team:

Bruce Lehrmann (right) arrives at the federal court of Australia in Sydney. Photograph: Dean Lewins/AAP

Updated at 23.38 EST