The 'Higgins' Trial

[Bobby]

Now I read the accused claims to have not slept with Higgins on the night.

He says that he never put it in.

No...he denies all sexual activity.

Really? - I think we should stop speculating.
The jury will decide.

[Aussie]

So....it now emerges the accused has given different versions about why he had to be at Parliament House at that late time of night.

Link.

Today, we hear he told cops he went there to get his 'keys' and to attend to some Question Time Brief for Reynolds.

What night of the week was this event, anyone know?

[Bobby]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-14/ ... /101534848

"He was in there, he was physically violating me. He was in my body. I know"





Brittany Higgins returns to ACT Supreme Court to resume giving evidence as Bruce Lehrmann trial continues

By Antoinette Radford
Posted 7h ago
7 hours ago
, updated 2h ago



A former Liberal Party staffer has directly addressed the man accused of raping her inside Parliament House after returning to the ACT Supreme Court today.
Key points:

    Brittany Higgins has rejected the defence's assertion that she was not raped
    Ms Higgins directly addressed accused rapist Bruce Lehrmann from the witness box
    A suppression order on evidence heard earlier this week has now been lifted, as Ms Higgins has finished testifying

Brittany Higgins resumed giving evidence in the trial of Bruce Lehrmann, after she was unavailable for most of the week.

Mr Lehrmann is charged with raping Ms Higgins in a ministerial office in 2019.

He has pleaded not guilty and says no sexual activity took place.

This morning, Ms Higgins spoke to Mr Lehrmann directly from the witness stand.

"Nothing was fine after what you did to me, nothing," she said.

Earlier in the morning, Mr Lehrmann's lawyer Steven Whybrow suggested to Ms Higgins that the alleged assault had never occurred.

"I don't accept it at all," she responded.

Mr Whybrow also asked Ms Higgins if she fabricated the allegations to save her job.

"I'm not a monster — I would never do anything like that," she said.

"You're asserting to me that I fabricated this just to keep my job and I care about my job, but I would never do that."

Later, Mr Whybrow once again suggested that Mr Lehrmann had never assaulted her.

She again rejected the assertion.

[The Grappler]

Done it for yez all before - under ACT Law - which covers activities in Parliament House not covered exclusively by Commonwealth Law - a drunken woman cannot give consent under any circumstances. IF sexual intercourse took place when she was in that state - it is not a question of whether rape occurred - it is a question of how serious it was. HOWEVER - there is zero substantial physical corroborating evidence in any way.

This is a test case for 'guilt upon accusation' so beloved of the feminists in their pursuit of absolute power.... and that is what they've made it into. As a corollary - this gives you all a more than clear indication of the true nature of QANGO appointed sheilas as 'commissioners' for this and that... and what their true purpose is...... and it ain't the protection of all genuine proven victims equally.... but the adherence to the concept that any complainant is a victim regardless of facts - and even more so when that complainant is a woman.

It's called The Cult Of the Victim - and anyone can become, by its rules - a victim by making an accusation.

Wrong on all fronts...