Read the grovelling apology from the top lawyer blamed for Lisa Wilkinson’s disastrous Logies speech – as she breaks silence after being SAVAGED by Bruce Lehrmann trial judge

Network Ten’s chief litigator has finally admitted she was wrong to approve Lisa Wilkinson’s disastrous Logies speech.

Tasha Smithies’ groveling apology was laid bare in an affidavit tendered to the Federal Court on Wednesday during a hearing into Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case against Network Ten and Wilkinson.

Ms Smithies had told the court in February that she believed there were no problems with Wilkinson’s Logies acceptance speech before it was delivered at the awards ceremony in June 2022.

The speech was televised eight days before Lehrmann’s rape trial and was treated as a potential contempt issue because Wilkinson referred to Brittany Higgins as a proven rape victim rather than an alleged rape victim.

As a direct result of that speech, the criminal trial was moved from June to October 2022 because the ACT Chief Justice was concerned that jurors may have been exposed to the intense publicity and form bias against Lehrmann.

During a cross-claim at Lehrmann’s defamation hearing in February, Ms Smithies refused to accept that her legal advice regarding the speech was bad.

However, her affidavit reflected a significant change of heart since Judge Michael Lee handed down his decision in the case on April 15 – which included findings about Wilkinson’s speech and Ms Smithies’ legal advice.

She said: ‘The verdict has had a profound and sobering impact on me. The eleven days since April 15, 2024 have been the most difficult of my career.

‘The day after the verdict was announced, I took a week off work to go away with my family.

‘I have read the judgment very carefully, particularly the parts relating to me and the advice I gave Ms Wilkinson in relation to the speech she gave at the TV Week Logie Awards on June 19, 2022.’

She called the judgment in paragraph 1054 in particular ‘spot on’.

At paragraph 1054 of the judgment, Judge Lee said: ‘There has been sufficient time for mature reflection and yet, even now, there is no recognition that the speech could have undermined and disrupted the administration of justice.

‘It’s one thing to make a mistake, even a serious mistake. After all, to make mistakes is human.

‘But I regret to say that Ms Smithies’ continued lack of insight into the inappropriateness of her conduct in connection with the speech reflects, in my view, a lack of proper appreciation of her professional obligations as a lawyer and her primary duty to the Court and the administration of justice.’

Ms Smithies said she had “thought deeply” about her legal advice to Wilkinson, the prejudice the speech caused and the impact it had on the Lehrmann trial.

She has now sought advice from Network Ten’s barrister, Matthew Collins KC, about the advice she gave Wilkinson, together with her evidence, and the conclusions Judge Lee drew about her conduct.

She continued: “I honestly believed at the time that Mrs. Wilkinson’s delivery [the speech] would not amount to contempt of court.

‘I have come to the conclusion that the evidence I gave on February 13 and 14, 2024 was misplaced.’

Ms Smithies was cross-examined by Wilkinson’s barrister Michael Elliott SC in February in Wilkinson’s civil case against Network Ten, a cross-claim in the defamation trial against Lehrmann.

She sued the network for more than $700,000 in legal fees she incurred when she hired defamation lawyer Sue Chrysanthou to defend her, instead of hiring Ten’s lawyers.

Wilkinson had claimed the network did not have her best interests at heart, which her lawyers tried to prove when Ms Smithies was questioned.

Network Ten had initially refused to reveal whether it had provided legal advice to Wilkinson over the Logies speech, before confirming that she had received legal advice but would not reveal the contents of that advice.

The advice only came to light during the counterclaim in February.

Mr Elliott accused Ms Smithies of hiding the advice because it would publicly embarrass her if it ever emerged that she gave the speech an endorsement.

“I am not personally or professionally ashamed of the advice I have received, Ms Wilkinson,” Ms Smithies had said.

Mr Elliott also said Network Ten could have released a media statement to clear Wilkinson’s name during the fallout from the Logies speech, and protect her from intense public criticism.

“You knew full well that there was nothing to stop Channel Ten making a statement saying that Ms Wilkinson had been advised on the Logies speech,” he suggested.

Mrs Smithies said: ‘I don’t accept that.’

Mr Elliott continued: ‘Then you are completely ill-equipped to play any role in Ms Wilkinson’s defence.’

She replied, “I don’t accept that.”

Wilkinson’s cross-claim was successful and the network was ordered to cover its legal costs.

In his findings on April 15, Judge Lee found on a balance of probabilities that Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins at Parliament House in March 2019.

The costs hearing on Wednesday was intended to determine what Lehrmann, as the loser of the lawsuit, will have to pay his opponents.