What Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation trial heard from Lisa Wilkinson in Federal Court this week

Maybe it’s the celebrity touch, but the public fascination with Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case has only increased this week.

Journalist Lisa Wilkinson’s evidence from the witness box provided compelling viewing on the Federal Court’s YouTube channel, as she locked horns with Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Matthew Richardson.

At some points, more than 21,000 people were watching the exchange unfold.

Some of the flashpoints were obvious — like the Silver Logie Wilkinson won for her interview on The Project with Brittany Higgins when she first revealed the allegation she’d been raped at Parliament House.

Mr Lehrmann was not named in the interview, but he says he was defamed because he was easily identifiable.

The core of the allegation is that after a night out drinking, Bruce Lehrmann sexually assaulted Brittany Higgins on the couch in the office of Senator Linda Reynolds for whom they both worked.

Mr Lehrmann was later charged with Ms Higgins’s alleged rape, but the trial was abandoned because of a juror’s misconduct, and there are no findings against him.

That is what cleared the way for his defamation case against Network Ten and Wilkinson.

Lisa Wilkinson’s Logies speech delayed Mr Lehrmann’s criminal trial by several months. (Supplied: Nine Entertainment)

Wilkinson’s Logies speech about the interview with Ms Higgins, only days out from the criminal trial, led to a delay of several months because of fears about the impact of the public attention.

Wilkinson has maintained she sought advice before giving the speech.

But Mr Richardson this week accused her of putting her “pride and ego” ahead of his client’s right to a fair trial.

Wilkinson denied that, but told Mr Richardson she’d not had any training in dealing with contempt of court in her 40 years as a journalist.

“Is that a serious answer?” Mr Richardson said.

“Yes … that’s why I thought about it,” Wilkinson said, after pausing before answering his question.

It set the tone for a line of tough questions.

Timing of request for comment

Bruce Lehrmann is suing journalist Lisa Wilkinson and Network Ten for defamation over an interview with Brittany Higgins on The Project.(AAP: Bianca De Marchi)

The first two weeks of the case were something of a re-run of Mr Lehrmann’s criminal trial.

But this week has seen the focus turn to the media and the decisions made by Network Ten staff before Ms Higgins’s interview was aired.

It’s been a disconcerting exercise, as long-established practices by most journalists were exposed to a rigorous cross-examination by Mr Richardson.

Not least of those were the efforts and timing of seeking a response from Mr Lehrmann before the broadcast, with both The Project producer Angus Llewellyn and Wilkinson pressed on the issue.

Mr Richardson suggested the network had not made a “genuine” effort to get in contact with Mr Lehrmann for comment.

Mr Llewellyn explained that it was common for those contacted not to respond at all, and that seeking a response too early could risk an injunction against the broadcast.

And Wilkinson said she had been preparing questions for Mr Lehrmann the day the interview was broadcast, in case he agreed to tell his story at short notice.

Questions around checking of inconsistencies

Lisa Wilkinson (left) is being represented by separate lawyers to Network Ten.  ( ABC News: Keana Naughton )

Mr Richardson has also paid particular attention to the details, asking both Mr Llewellyn and Wilkinson about whether they were thorough enough in checking the inconsistencies in Ms Higgins’s story.

A primary target was the opening words for the segment, which announced a story about “a young woman forced to choose between her career and the pursuit of justice”.

Wilkinson conceded there was never an overt threat to Ms Higgins’s job, and that it was Ms Higgins applying the pressure to herself, because she knew in the real world of politics she would be regarded as a “political problem” and her career would be over.

Though Wilkinson also told the court she did not write that part of the script.

Mr Richardson also took aim at the portrayal of those involved in handling the incident, including Senator Linda Reynolds, for whom both Mr Lehrmann and Ms Higgins worked at the time.

He said the pair’s then-chief of staff Fiona Brown was depicted in the story as “some kind of vile apparatchik” for handing Ms Higgins a brochure and offering her the afternoon off.

Mr Richardson later took aim at the inclusion of Ms Higgins’s account of an exchange with Senator Michealia Cash, who was her boss after Senator Reynolds.

Ms Higgins recalled Senator Cash telling her she’d have to “suck it up” after she’d expressed concern about feeling panicky when entering Parliament House each day.

“It’s cartoonish villainy, isn’t it, the way that it’s portrayed there?” he said.

Wilkinson rejected the suggestions, along with claims the government response was buried in the program, after it differed from Ms Higgins’s account.

But it was a text from Wilkinson to Mr Llewellyn on the day the story emerged, saying: “Penny Wong magnificent, Reynolds lying through her teeth” that Mr Richardson said showed Wilkinson had lost her objectivity, and was prepared to believe Ms Higgins’s story no matter the evidence.

The text was sent during question time in the federal parliament when Senator Reynolds had suggested she had tried to help Ms Higgins.

Wilkinson suggested the lie was that Senator Reynolds said she had not known the details of the allegation when she had a meeting with Brittany Higgins in her office, and if she had she would have had the meeting elsewhere.

“You could not be objective, I suggest, in terms of making a fair assessment of the evidence,” Mr Richardson said.

Wilkinson disagreed.

A highly unusual case

Brittany Higgins gave a detailed account of her alleged rape to the media before she went to the police.(AAP: Dean Lewins)

This has been a highly unusual case, from the allegation, to the criminal trial and onto the defamation hearing.

And interviews — like the one Ms Higgins gave to The Project — are rare.

Usually, they involve someone who has been through a successful conviction and they are telling their story at the end of the road, not the beginning.

But what was unusual in this case, was that Ms Higgins was interviewed by the media before she went to the police, or Mr Lehrmann was charged, or there was any trial — even if it was abandoned.

In that sense this case has broken new ground.

Ms Higgins maintains she had been poorly treated when she revealed her allegation to her employers and wanted things to change at Parliament House.

But the coming week will only see the challenge to the media’s motivations and practices escalate further, as Mr Lehrmann’s defamation trial reaches its final stages.

Mr Lehrmann’s lawyers will continue to mount a vigorous cross-examination.

But Wilkinson and Network Ten also have tough and effective barristers in Sue Chrysanthou and Matthew Collins.

The Federal Court’s YouTube channel is still worth watching for some time yet.