Linda Reynolds vs Brittany Higgins Defamation Trial LIVE Updates: Day Five

Linda Reynolds’ cross-examination continues at 10.30am local time, 12.30pm AEST, on Thursday in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

On Wednesday, the Liberal Party senator told the court she had no choice but to sue her former aide, Brittany Higgins, for defamation.

The case was brought following a series of social media posts by Ms Higgins and her husband, David Sharaz, which she claims have damaged her reputation.

But Ms Reynolds claimed in court this week that the messages were actually part of a years-long campaign of intimidation.

Ms Higgins has long maintained that Ms Reynolds failed to support her after she was raped in her office in Parliament House by colleague Bruce Lehrmann in March 2019.

At the time, Mrs Reynolds was Minister for Defence Industry. Lehrmann and Mrs Higgins were her staff in Canberra.

Ms Higgins accuses Ms Reynolds of making her choose between her career and reporting her rape to the police. She believes the Liberal Party tried to cover up her rape.

She first made these allegations against Ms Reynolds in the form of two media interviews: the first was a written article published by news.com.au and the second was a television interview with Lisa Wilkinson on The Project.

Both interviews were published on February 15, 2021.

The television interview in particular made telling allegations that there had been a political cover-up by the then Liberal government and by Ms Reynolds and her chief of staff, Fiona Brown.

Mrs Reynolds says she had no idea before then that Mrs Higgins held any grudge against her.

After the broadcast, Ms. Reynolds was questioned about the rape on Question Time. There were calls for her resignation and angry citizens began trolling her and her family.

Ms Reynolds has consistently denied forcing Ms Higgins to choose between her career and the assault, and says she never tried to cover up the rape.

Ms Reynolds told the court on Wednesday that she had not defended herself properly when the allegations were first made public, as she believed Ms Higgins had the right to speak out on the matter in any way she wanted.

She disagreed with what Ms Higgins said about her and her staff, but she also did not believe the criminal complaint should be dealt with out of court.

The senator also did not want to betray Ms Higgins’ trust by revealing the contents of their private meetings in the weeks following the attack.

In December 2022, Ms Higgins won $2.4 million in damages from the Commonwealth over the way she was treated by her employers – Ms Reynolds and Ms Brown – following her rape.

That claim contained a number of allegations against Ms Reynolds and Ms Brown, but neither was allowed to attend the mediation to defend themselves.

Ms Reynolds referred the payment to the Anti-Corruption Commission because she believes Attorney General Mark Dreyfus personally decided to block her participation in the mediation.

In the years that followed, Ms. Higgins and Mr. Sharaz reportedly continued to spread the story that Ms. Reynolds was trying to cover up the rape.

She told the court that the couple knew that anything they posted on social media would be picked up by the media and republished, including some of the posts about her.

The messages alleged that Ms Reynolds was harassing Ms Higgins.

Mrs Reynolds expressed confusion over reports from the couple suggesting she had no right to defend herself against the allegations.

She told the court that Ms Higgins appeared to believe that seeking justice was a form of bullying.

“By demanding justice and making sure my voice was heard, it was somehow silenced,” she said.

“By participating in legal proceedings, I bullied her.”

Ms Reynolds said she never denied that Ms Higgins had been raped. The only problem was the allegations against her.

She told the court she has been in despair for three years, her health is deteriorating and her friends, family and staff are constantly receiving calls asking how they can support a “bad woman”.

The senator believed that starting a defamation case was the only way Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz would stop the allegations against her.