Linda Reynolds Claims Attorney General ‘Screwed Me’ in Defamation Case Against Higgins

Most important points
  • Senator Linda Reynolds sent three documents to a journalist from The Australian via her personal email account.
  • Reynolds said the attorney general failed to provide her with a means to refute Brittany Higgins’ claims.
  • Reynolds denies using her personal email account to hide her actions from scrutiny.
Sen. Linda Reynolds says she sent confidential documents about Brittany Higgins to a reporter because she was convinced the attorney general was “pissing her off.”
The former minister is suing Higgins for defamation over a series of social media posts that allegedly contained untruths, which she claims have damaged her reputation.

On Thursday, she told the Perth District Court that she had sent three documents to Janet Albrechtsen, a journalist for The Australian, relating to Higgins’ settlement with the Commonwealth.

“I chose her because she is the most balanced,” she said.

“There was no agreement or anything like that that she would be favorable to me in any way.”

Reynolds questioned over use of personal email account

Senator Reynolds used her personal Gmail account to send the letters her Commonwealth’s attorney sent to her.
When Higgins’ attorney, Rachael Young, asked why she had done so, the senator said she wanted to let the reporter know that she had been denied the opportunity to refute Higgins’ claims that she had mishandled her alleged rape.
“Claims that had expired. The statute of limitations had expired,” Senator Reynolds said.

“Yes, I was extremely angry because I could see that the attorney general of this country was screwing me. So I absolutely wanted her to know and I wanted the public to know.”

A woman in a black jacket (Linda Reynolds) is surrounded by reporters with microphones outside a courthouse.

Western Australia Liberal Senator Linda Reynolds has denied sending documents to The Australian from her personal email account to avoid Freedom of Information Act scrutiny. Source: MONKEY / Richard Wainwright

The senator denied that she selected Albrechtsen because she believed the journalist would be less favorable to Higgins in her reporting than others.

“I provided her with evidence of my allegations of corruption and then it was up to her how she would report it,” she said.
“I have never seen the final claims against me, the waiver, and I have not had any opportunity to defend the claims.
“They didn’t let me defend myself. I could still have defended them if I had the chance,” she said.

Senator Reynolds denied that she used her personal email account to send the documents and thus hide her actions from scrutiny.

Attorney general ‘corruptly manipulated the law,’ says Reynolds

She agreed with Young that she was pleased when she saw Albrechtsen’s article a few days later.
However, she denied that she wanted to turn over the documents to raise questions about Higgins’ $2.4 million settlement.
“It’s actually the other way around. It’s about the way the Commonwealth has dealt with the claim,” she said.
“I had no problem with Ms. Higgins in this process at all. I was very clear that this was about the Attorney General and how I believe he had corruptly manipulated the law to silence me, so my problem was never with Ms. Higgins.”

Young also questioned the senator about the problems Albrechtsen’s article could cause Higgins and her ongoing mental health issues.

“I had no idea what the mental health of (Ms Higgins) was and what I thought was most important was exposing what I thought was corruption by the Attorney General,
“And you didn’t want to know what her mental health was before you sent those three messages?” Young said.
“No,” the senator replied.
Higgins defends himself by arguing that the facts are true and that it was reasonable to comment on matters of public interest relating to government and political affairs.
She alleged that her colleague Bruce Lehrmann raped her in Senator Reynolds’ office in 2019.
Lehrmann has always denied the allegations and his trial was marred by juror misconduct.

The process continues.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *