Bruce Lehrmann’s only prospect of making money is by using OnlyFans for the adult content subscription service, because he’s on Centrelink, facing bankruptcy and unable to raise $200,000 to appeal , his lawyer told the court.
The fate of Lehrmann’s appeal against his devastating defamation loss to Network 10 and Lisa Wilkinson hangs in the balance.
The network has asked the Federal Court to order that Lehrmann post $200,000 bail so that his appeal can be heard by the full bench of the Federal Court.
The former Liberal staffer and now unemployed student is trying to overturn Judge Michael Lee’s painful findings after losing his high-stakes defamation battle.
Lehrmann is fighting a request from Ten to post a $200,000 bond – to guarantee their legal costs – before he can appeal.
Lehrmann’s lawyer Zali Burrows (pictured) told the court her client’s only prospect of making money is to go to OnlyFans because he is on Centrelink and cannot afford a $200,000 bail to appeal.
FANS ONLY
Lehrmann’s lawyer Zali Burrows told the court on Monday that Lehrmann’s only prospect of making money was a move to OnlyFans.
She described her client as “probably the most hated man in Australia”.
“I can’t imagine a worse form of defamation than being labeled a rapist,” she said.
‘He’s a young man, he has his whole life behind him. He really needs his day in court to defend the charge of being called a rapist.”
Judge Lee made his findings based on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, which is below the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.
And Ms Burrows said most of the public did not understand the difference.
The court was told Lehrmann was now receiving Centrelink benefits and could not post $200,000 bail.
“It’s a bit rich to ask him to put up $200,000 when they helped contribute to the reason he’s virtually unemployed,” she said.
“The only chance he would probably ever have to make money is through OnlyFans or something like that.”
Ms Burrows told the court the application was a ‘bullying tactic’ because Ten ‘knows my client will not be able to come up with $200,000’.
She added that Lehrmann was “afraid” to appear in court because of the “media attack.”
BANKRUPTCY
In a landmark decision made in April, on the balance of probabilities, Lehrmann raped former colleague Brittany Higgins in Senator Linda Reynolds’ ministerial office at Parliament House in March 2019.
He sued over Ms Higgins’ The Project interview in February 2021, but suffered a crushing loss before being ordered to pay $2 million towards Ten’s legal costs.
Ms Burrows is also requesting a stay of the $2 million costs order against Lehrmann so that his appeal can be heard.
Matthew Collins, acting on behalf of Network Ten, told the court on Monday that if Lehrmann had to pay the $2 million costs order he would go bankrupt.
He added that a bankruptcy notice had been served on Lehrmann in July.
“Frankly, we assume there will never be any recovery, but that’s just an assumption on our part,” Dr. Collins said.
The parties appeared in the Federal Court on Monday during a hearing before Judge Wendy Abraham, who will give her judgment on both applications at a later date.
Ms Higgins appeared as Ten’s key witness at the trial
OVER THE LINE
Ms Wilkinson’s lawyer, Sue Chrysanthou, told the court that Judge Abraham must decide whether public confidence in the justice system would be eroded if Lehrmann was prevented from appealing because of a $200,000 bail order.
“He came to this court by choice,” Ms Chrysanthou said.
“He came here and pleaded his first rape charge.
“He did this after escaping the criminal process, going through the process and escaping a conviction, or an acquittal to be honest – perhaps an unsatisfactory outcome for him.
“That’s why I escaped a good decision. Because he was not acquitted because of the DPP’s conduct, which is public knowledge.
“But when he came here, he decided to take up the fight.
‘He crossed the line and asked this court because he knew how likely it was that Network 10 and my client (Ms Wilkinson) would plead the truth. He made that decision.
“And that’s a factor that runs counter to the argument he would make about the public interest.”
‘DEVASTATING’
Dr. Collins told the court that Lehrmann was ordered to post $200,000 bail because he was unable to meet his existing obligations after being ordered to pay $2 million in costs.
“Mr Lehrmann is unable to pay his existing debts, let alone any costs that might arise in the appeal,” Dr Collins said.
‘And that is a matter that is in our favor if the application for security of costs is granted.’
Dr. Collins has argued that while the findings against Lehrmann were “devastating,” that does not mean there is a public interest in an appeal.
“He’s had his day in court, he’s had a very expensive trial that was conducted in full view of the entire nation,” Dr. Collins said.
‘He was very ably represented and His Honor had made findings at the end of the day.’
Pictured is Lisa Wilkinson with her lawyer Sue Chrysanthou
Pictured: Ten’s lawyer Matt Collins
‘HOPELESS’
Earlier on Monday morning, Dr. Collins dismissed Lehrmann’s appeal as “vaguely moot” and “hopeless.”
In an amended appeal filed with the district court, Lehrmann claims Judge Lee was wrong to uphold Ten’s justification defense.
“Finding a defensive justification must be at least vaguely arguable,” Dr. Collins told the court.
“But it faces the usual difficulties associated with persuading an appeals court to overturn a trial judge’s factual findings.
‘In this case… the creditworthiness of the two key players was the central issue that ultimately animated His Honor’s factual findings.’
Dr. Collins described two of Lehrmann’s four pleas as “hopeless.”
‘DOES NOT MEAN ANY RESPECT’
Lehrmann is not in the courtroom.
Ms Burrows told the court Lehrmann was not present but watched via a link on the Federal Court’s YouTube account.
“He means no disrespect by not appearing,” Ms Burrows told the court.
Ms Wilkinson and Ten successfully defended the lawsuit
SECURITY
Ten’s lawyers filed an application earlier this year asking the court to order Lehrmann to post $200,000 as security for their legal fees related to the appeal.
Ten asks Lehrmann to pay the bail and, if he does not, that the Federal Court permanently suspend the appeal proceedings.
The $200,000 is intended to cover Network 10’s legal costs in the event Lehrmann is unsuccessful in his appeal.
LEGAL BILL OF $2 MIL
Ms Burrows is also seeking an order deferring the $2 million costs order against Lehrmann.
In June, Lehrmann was ordered to pay $2 million for their legal fees following his failed defamation case.
The court was previously told that Lehrmann could go bankrupt if he could not meet the costs as he is now unemployed and a student.
GOING BACK FOR HIS HAT
Lehrmann appealed in May after consistently denying that he had sexually assaulted his former colleague.
Lehrmann initially filed an appeal himself.
But Ms Burrows later filed an amended appeal claiming Judge Lee was wrong to uphold Ten’s justification defence.
They also dispute Judge Lee’s findings that he would have received only $20,000 in damages had he won.
CCTV footage of Lehrmann and Ms Higgins entering Parliament
Lehrmann was found to have raped Ms Higgins in Parliament House
The former Liberal staffer sued Ten and Ms Wilkinson over her interview with Ms Higgins on The Project, in which the former political staffer said she was raped by a former colleague.
In a landmark ruling, Judge Lee ruled in April that, based on the civil standard of probability, Lehrmann had raped Ms. Higgins, dismissing Lehrmann’s lawsuit.
Judge Lee said that “it is more likely than not” that Lehrmann “was so intent on gratification that he was indifferent to Ms. Higgins’ consent, and therefore proceeded with sexual intercourse without concern for whether she consented.”
Commenting on Lehrmann’s decision to file a lawsuit after criminal proceedings against him were dropped, Judge Lee said: “After escaping from the lion’s den, Mr. Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat.’
He was tried in the ACT Supreme Court in 2022 after pleading not guilty to one count of sexual intercourse without consent.
The trial was halted due to juror misconduct and the Director of Public Prosecutions dropped the charges and plans for a retrial over concerns for Ms Higgins’ welfare.