A Network Ten senior lawyer has defended her decision to twice legally approve Lisa Wilkinson's Logies speech, despite it delaying the Parliament House rape trial.
"I stand by the advice that was given," Ten's senior litigation counsel, Tasha Smithies, told the Federal Court on Wednesday.
"Ms Wilkinson was inextricably intertwined with Ms Higgins. And the words I would use is Ms Wilkinson became part of the story."
Ms Smithies claimed not giving the speech would, in fact, have been "more prejudicial".
The lawyer also said a letter of "profound regret and apology" sent to the ACT's Chief Justice was about the criminal trial's vacation, not her advice.
Justice Michael Lee has previously said it was "inconceivable to me that any legally-qualified person" could have seen the speech in question as "anything other inadvisable and inappropriate".
Legal costs battle
Ms Wilkinson is fighting for Ten to cover her legal costs, expected to exceed a million dollars, racked up during the defamation civil action brought forward by Bruce Lehrmann against her and her employer.
While Justice Lee has reserved his decision in the high-profile defamation case, he is now tasked with deciding if it was reasonable for Ms Wilkinson to retain separate legal counsel for the trial.
And if so, how much of the costs the television network must bear.
The Logies speech, which praised Ms Higgins, the advice provided ahead of it, and the support given in its aftermath are now key debates in the cross-claim battle.
Ms Smithies returned to the witness box on Wednesday after previously telling the court she was "not personally or professionally embarrassed by the advice I provided Ms Wilkinson".
Not delivering speech 'more prejudicial'
The court heard Ten's lawyer still held the same view she did ahead of the June 2022 speech, namely that the advice was "completely appropriate".
"You understood when the speech was being made, what Ms Wilkinson was doing was lending credence to the complainant, a woman whose courage, whose story, must be believed. Would that be fair?" Justice Lee asked.
Ms Smithies responded: "I would accept that, yes."
Justice Lee: "And you as a solicitor thought that was appropriate to occur by a Crown witness eight days before a criminal trial of a man who's facing a serious criminal charge?"
Ms Smithies: "I think given all the circumstances available, that was the preferred course to her not giving a speech."
The lawyer said the speech was in line with Ms Wilkinson's "clear and unequivocal" support of Ms Higgins in the media and on social media in the months leading up to the trial.
"To deviate from that position in the speech, in my mind, was more prejudicial because it would be saying that she was wavering in her support of Ms Higgins," she said.
"I'm accepting of the fact that, and respectful of the fact that, others may hold a different view in relation to the advice."
'Isolated, unprotected, abandoned'
Ms Wilkinson told the Federal Court on Tuesday she "alone" was accused of derailing Mr Lehrmann's criminal trial by giving the Logies speech.
She then felt "isolated, unprotected and abandoned" by her employer, who dropped her from hosting duties and did not publicly defend her amid intense media scrutiny over the controversial speech.
"I was being blamed for giving that speech and all the blame was falling on me," she previously said from the witness box.
"I was asking Channel Ten to admit the role that they had played because I was being portrayed in the media as legally irresponsible."
Ms Wilkinson says Ten was self-interested and she lost faith in the network's ability to legally defend her.
In June 2022, Chief Justice Lucy McCallum said the speech in question had the effect of endorsing Ms Higgins' credibility in circumstances where her believability would be a central trial issue.
The defamation trial
The evidence and submissions being heard in the cross-claim this week are also being accepted in the principle defamation proceedings brought forward by Mr Lehrmann against Ms Wilkinson and Ten.
He is suing the journalist and her employer over a February 2021 The Project which aired Ms Higgins allegation of being raped inside Parliament House two years earlier.
The interview did not name Mr Lehrmann as the accused man but he claims being identified, defamed and "publicly maligned as certainly the most prominent rapist" in recent Australian history.
Justice Lee has flagged he expects to deliver a decision in the main case in March.
Mr Lehrmann has always denied raping Ms Higgins in March 2019, when the pair worked as staffers for Senator Linda Reynolds.
No findings have been made against him.
His criminal trial was aborted due to juror misconduct, with the charge levelled at him later discontinued over concerns for Ms Higgins' mental health.
- Support is available for those who may be distressed. Phone Lifeline 13 11 14; Canberra Rape Crisis Centre 6247 2525.
