…By Judah Olanisebee for TDPel Media.
Brittany Higgins, the former staffer who alleged she was sexually assaulted in Linda Reynolds’ office, is now accused of not returning a black and white Carla Zampatti jacket borrowed from Senator Reynolds’ wardrobe on the morning after the alleged assault.
The security footage presented in court showed Ms Higgins entering the office wearing a white dress at around 1 am and leaving at approximately 10 am the following morning, still wearing the designer jacket.
Senator Reynolds claims she never received the jacket back, which is valued at over $1000.
In addition to the jacket issue, Senator Reynolds plans to refer Ms Higgins’ compensation payout, potentially amounting to $3 million, to a newly established federal anti-corruption body.
Questions have been raised about the substantial claim being granted without being filed in court, prompting concerns about the transparency and legitimacy of the compensation process.
Radio host Ben Fordham addressed the referral of the compensation payout to the anti-corruption body, highlighting the need for someone to initiate the investigation.
He stated that if no one else takes action, Senator Reynolds herself will make the referral.
Fordham also highlighted the circumstances surrounding the rape trial against Mr Lehrmann, which was discontinued due to concerns about Ms Higgins’ mental health.
Shortly after the trial was abandoned, Ms Higgins’ lawyers reportedly prepared a draft compensation claim against the Commonwealth, Senator Reynolds, and Senator Michaelia Cash, seeking redress for sexual harassment, sex discrimination, disability discrimination, negligence, and victimization.
The anticipated claim was valued at around $3 million, encompassing future economic loss, past economic loss, and general damages.
The settlement was reached after just one day of mediation, with the terms remaining confidential.
Fordham drew attention to Senator Reynolds’ questions regarding the sudden readiness for mediation after being informed of Ms Higgins’ mental health crisis.
Senator Reynolds also questioned the decision to proceed with mediation when no civil claim for compensation had been filed in court.
Notably, Senator Reynolds and Senator Cash were not present during the mediation session, despite being named in the claim.
It is important to seek comments and perspectives from both Ms Higgins and Senator Reynolds to provide a balanced understanding of the situation.
In a separate interview, Senator Katy Gallagher addressed questions regarding the compensation claim and her alleged association with Ms Higgins’ partner, David Sharaz.
When asked about her relationship with Mr. Sharaz, Senator Gallagher clarified that she knew him from his previous role as a journalist in Canberra during her time as chief minister.
However, she emphasized that she had no further comments to add and reiterated that she had no involvement in the compensation package for Ms Higgins.
Conclusion:
The accusations surrounding the borrowed jacket add another layer of complexity to the ongoing controversy surrounding Brittany Higgins’ case.
The dispute over the jacket raises questions about personal belongings and potential misunderstandings amidst the broader context of the assault allegations.
The planned referral of the compensation payout to a federal anti-corruption body signals the need for an independent review of the process and decisions surrounding the settlement.
This development adds a new dimension to the legal and ethical discussions surrounding the case, demanding transparency and accountability in the handling of compensation claims related to such serious matters.
The involvement of key figures, such as Senator Reynolds and Senator Cash, raises questions about their absence during the mediation process and their role in addressing the allegations made by Ms Higgins.
It is crucial to consider all perspectives and seek clarity from the involved parties to fully understand the implications and intricacies of the situation.