Lehrmann Admits Fabricating Texts in Higgins Defamation Case

Bruce Lehrmann took the stand for the first time on Thursday, admitting he had fabricated certain text messages while grappling with the initial fallout from the public airing of Brittany Higgins' rape allegations.

The former parliamentary staffer spent the day being cross-examined over his immediate response to the media coverage in February 2021, when his emotional state swung between outrage and a determination to strike back through the courts.

On the evening the allegations aired on The Project, Lehrmann met with his lawyer and sent text messages to his girlfriend that revealed a strikingly confident assessment of his prospects. "Criminal is off the cards completely," he wrote, adding that if he was named, "I'm up for millions in defamation."

That confidence has since been tested by events that unfolded very differently. He was charged with sexual intercourse without consent in August 2021—just months after those texts expressing certainty about the criminal path. A trial eventually collapsed last year following jury misconduct, and prosecutors dropped the charges in December, citing concerns for Higgins' mental health.

Now Lehrmann is pursuing the defamation avenue he sketched out over drinks on that February evening in 2021, suing Channel 10, presenter Lisa Wilkinson, News Corp, and political editor Samantha Maiden. But the case hinges on a legal hurdle: he took two years to file, well beyond the standard limitation period. Justice Michael Lee must decide whether to extend that deadline, and his ruling will determine whether the case advances or collapses.

Under questioning on Thursday, Lehrmann described himself as a mixture of "upset and angry" when the interviews dropped, saying he wanted to "fight back against the media." He told the court he had spent six hours with lawyer Warwick Korn that day, initially resolved to commence defamation proceedings. Yet Korn apparently advised patience—to wait until any potential criminal case concluded before launching civil action.

That strategic pause lasted longer than anticipated. Higgins' original complaint to the AFP came in April 2019, just days after the alleged Parliament House incident. But she asked police to halt the investigation a month later, two days before the federal election was called. When her interviews with Wilkinson and Maiden finally aired, almost two years had passed.

The cross-examination zeroed in on the credibility of Lehrmann's recollection. When pressed by Collins KC about the type of legal advice he sought and when, Lehrmann conceded he had been drinking that evening and some of his statements—conveyed in the texts—were not accurate accounts of what had actually transpired. The discrepancies between what he said in writing and what he now recalls underscore the murkiness surrounding those early hours following the public revelation.

The hearing has effectively presented a portrait of a man reacting in real time to explosive allegations—emotional, strategic, and deeply confident about his legal position. That confidence, at least on the criminal side, proved misplaced. Whether it holds on the defamation front now rests with the court's decision on the timeline question.

Both Wilkinson and News Corp have signalled they intend to defend themselves by proving the truth of the allegations. The hearing continues to probe the foundations of Lehrmann's case, forcing him to confront the gap between what he asserted in the heat of the moment and what events subsequently revealed.