Page:Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment).pdf/237

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

that – that was to be looked at over the next few weeks. Like, these – these questions are asked on 2 February. We – we weren’t airing anything; it's a pre-recorded interview.

Mr Llewellyn, on 31 January, Ms Wilkinson had said to you:

Why is she delaying, or at least appears to be delaying getting answers on that? Without raising alarm bells with her, do you think you can ask her today or first thing tomorrow? It's a crucial point when it comes to further blocking of her being able to gather evidence.

Ms Wilkinson thought it was a crucial point, didn't she?---I think the words just there, when it came to "gathering further evidence", so she was looking at, you know, if there were other things. It wasn't about specifically about the photo.

Mr Llewellyn, what Ms Wilkinson was saying is that there needs to be an explanation for why Ms Higgins is unable to produce all of this material. I suggest to you that's the plain meaning of what she was saying?---Ms Higgins – sorry, Ms Wilkinson is, like me, wanting to find out more.

And despite the repeated promises Ms Higgins had made to have her phone checked, you - - -?---Sorry. There were repeated promises?

Yes. She mentioned it twice in the meeting on 27 January and then Ms Wilkinson requested it again here. And, in fact, I think it's three times. I will pull up the references, but yes, she asked you at least – she told you at least twice that she was going to take her phone to be looked at, didn't she?---Look, from – from what I recall, I know that she – she definitely told us she was going to get her phone looked at, and - - -

And she never did?---Well, like I said, I – I didn't expect Vodafone to be all that helpful.

So did you even ask if she had had it checked?---I – I – I'm – I'm – I can't remember exactly when, but yes, I'm sure I would have.

Well, it's not recorded, I suggest to you, in any document after 2 February?---That doesn't mean I didn't speak with her about it.

848 This evidence that he was "sure" Ms Higgins "checked" is uncorroborated and, when given, was unpersuasive.

IVFurther Steps Before Broadcast

849 On 3 February, Ms Higgins signed an "Adult Appearance Release" (Ex R350) in which she agreed to the following (cl 2):

You warrant and represent to 7PM and 10 that any information contributed by you to the Program will be true and factually accurate, that you own or are entitled to all right, title and interest (including copyright) in any materials (i.e. documents, pictures or videos) provided by you to 7PM or 10 for the purpose of inclusion in the Program and that such materials do not contain confidential information or otherwise breach a duty of confidence owed by You to a third party.


Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 369
229