This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/29/hanson-young-defamation-case-keneally-says-leyonhjelm-harmed-senators-reputation

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Hanson-Young defamation case: Greens senator says she felt 'set-upon' Hanson-Young defamation case: Greens senator says she felt 'set-upon'
(32 minutes later)
The former New South Wales premier and senator Kristina Keneally has told a court comments by former senator David Leyonhjelm about Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young would have led to the impression she was a “narrow-minded, one-dimensional misandrist”. Sarah Hanson-Young says she felt “set-upon” and humiliated after former Senator David Leyonhjelm gave an interview on the Sky News program Outsiders in which he claimed the Greens senator implied “all men are rapists” during a parliamentary debate.
On the first day of week-long defamation hearing in the federal court in Sydney on Monday, the court heard the Greens senator had been “acutely hurt” by comments made by Leyonhjelm following a bitter debate in the Senate last year. Hanson-Young took the stand in the federal court in Sydney on Monday on the first day in her week-long defamation trial against Leyonhjelm, accusing him of “bullying and intimidation” in an attempt to discredit her.
Hanson-Young is suing Leyonhjelm over interviews he gave between 28 June and 2 July to Sky News, Melbourne radio station 3AW and the ABC’s 7.30 program, and a media statement posted on 28 June.Hanson-Young is suing Leyonhjelm over interviews he gave between 28 June and 2 July to Sky News, Melbourne radio station 3AW and the ABC’s 7.30 program, and a media statement posted on 28 June.
It followed a feud in the Senate in June last year sparked by comments in a debate about women’s safety in which Hanson-Young alleged Leyonhjelm had told her to “stop shagging men”. In the interview, played in court on Monday, Leyonhjelm accused Hanson-Young of saying “words to the effect of men should stop raping women, the implication being all men are rapists”.
Senators to testify in Hanson-Young defamation trial against Leyonhjelm The Greens senator described being on stage at an event in South Australia when she became aware of his comments, and described the “humiliating” experience of explaining what had happened to former Greens leader Bob Brown.
In the subsequent media broadcasts he elaborated on his comments to Hanson-Young on the floor of parliament, asserting, for example, that she had said “something along the lines of all men being rapists”. “It was a pretty awful thing to have to explain to Bob, who’s been a political and professional mentor of mine for a long time, and an older man, to explain what had happened,” she said.
Hanson-Young says she was defamed by his portrayal of her as a hypocrite and misandrist. “It was humiliating [and] I still feel quite anxious about the whole thing.”
In his opening statement Hanson-Young’s barrister, Kieran Smark SC, said Leyonhjelm had “falsely attributed to her words she never said and then [sought] to build a further attack upon that false foundation”. The interviews at the centre of the defamation trial followed a feud in the Senate in June last year which began after a debate about women’s safety in which Leyonhjelm told Hanson-Young to “stop shagging men”.
Hanson-Young accused Leyonhjelm of engaging in a “campaign” against her after the comments and made her feel like she was “being punished for standing up for myself”.
“It’s one thing to be in the chamber having a political debate it’s another thing to step outside and have to deal with lies and smears and excuses have nothing to do with the debate you were having, and to have that constant bullying [and] intimidation continue … for 10 months now,” she said in court on Monday.
Hanson-Young is claiming she was defamed by Leyonhjelm because the comments made her out to be a hypocrite and misandrist. The court heard replays of all three interviews at the centre of the case.
She said she felt “trapped” after Leyonhjelm’s interview on the 7.30 Report.
“I was hoping Mr Leyonhjelm would reflect on what he was doing and cease, in fact I asked him via my lawyer Rebecaa Giles for him to stop,” she said.
“So when I was sitting there in the chair listening to this interview and hearing that he was doubling down [and] continuing to spread these lies, continuing to cast aspersions about my character and reputation I felt very trapped and I knew I was going to have to respond.”
In his opening statement on Monday her barrister, Kieran Smark SC, said Leyonhjelm had “falsely attributed to her words she never said and then [sought] to build a further attack upon that false foundation”.
Smark said Leyonhjelm’s comments made Hanson-Young out to be “a hypocrite in that she claimed that all men were rapists but nevertheless had sexual relations with them”, and a misandrist by alleging she has “made the absurd claim that all men are rapists”.Smark said Leyonhjelm’s comments made Hanson-Young out to be “a hypocrite in that she claimed that all men were rapists but nevertheless had sexual relations with them”, and a misandrist by alleging she has “made the absurd claim that all men are rapists”.
He said Leyonhjelm had engaged in “something of a campaign” against Hanson-Young, and that his comments had been “acutely hurtful” to the Senator.He said Leyonhjelm had engaged in “something of a campaign” against Hanson-Young, and that his comments had been “acutely hurtful” to the Senator.
On Monday Keneally was called as a character witness on behalf of Hanson-Young, saying she believed people who “read this commentary” by Leyonhjelm would have believed Hanson-Young was a “narrow-minded, one-dimensional misandrist”. Earlier on Monday the former New South Wales premier and senator Kristina Keneally told the court that Leyonhjelm’s comments would have led to the impression she was a “narrow-minded, one-dimensional misandrist”.
Keneally said Hanson-Young’s “advocacy on behalf of women and children to be safe from violence would be undermined” by the comments, particularly in the eyes of people who were not previously familiar with her. Senators to testify in Hanson-Young defamation trial against Leyonhjelm
Keneally was called as a character witness on behalf of Hanson-Young, saying she believed people who “read this commentary” by Leyonhjelm would have believed Hanson-Young was a “narrow-minded, one-dimensional misandrist”.
She said Hanson-Young’s “advocacy on behalf of women and children to be safe from violence would be undermined” by the comments, particularly in the eyes of people who were not previously familiar with her.
In his cross-examination of Keneally, Leyonhjelm’s barrister, Tony Morris QC, suggested the former senator’s comments about Hanson-Young were part of the general rough and tumble of Australian politics and not defamatory.In his cross-examination of Keneally, Leyonhjelm’s barrister, Tony Morris QC, suggested the former senator’s comments about Hanson-Young were part of the general rough and tumble of Australian politics and not defamatory.
While she agreed “in general terms” with his assertion that politics had become more aggressive, she said it could also “be the case that throwing mud sometimes … can stick, even if it’s not true”.While she agreed “in general terms” with his assertion that politics had become more aggressive, she said it could also “be the case that throwing mud sometimes … can stick, even if it’s not true”.
Hanson-Young had characterised Leyonhjelm’s comment as “slut-shaming”, and during cross-examination Keneally was asked about the meaning of the term.Hanson-Young had characterised Leyonhjelm’s comment as “slut-shaming”, and during cross-examination Keneally was asked about the meaning of the term.
She defined it as using a person’s sexual activity as “a weapon in political debate”, saying she did not think it was “appropriate”.She defined it as using a person’s sexual activity as “a weapon in political debate”, saying she did not think it was “appropriate”.
Keneally entered the Senate chamber in the latter part of the debate in June last year, and said her seat in the chamber was too far from Hanson-Young and Leyonhjelm to be able to hear any conversation.Keneally entered the Senate chamber in the latter part of the debate in June last year, and said her seat in the chamber was too far from Hanson-Young and Leyonhjelm to be able to hear any conversation.
She said she did not recall any interjections made by Hanson-Young during the debate.She said she did not recall any interjections made by Hanson-Young during the debate.
The former trade union leader Bill Kelty was also called as a character witness by Hanson-Young. He said that while he believed “standards have slipped” in public debate, the comments made by Leyonhjelm were different from anything he had experienced in his public life.The former trade union leader Bill Kelty was also called as a character witness by Hanson-Young. He said that while he believed “standards have slipped” in public debate, the comments made by Leyonhjelm were different from anything he had experienced in his public life.
“I have suffered slings and arrows [but] in my entire political life people have not accused me of being against women simply because they are women,” he said.“I have suffered slings and arrows [but] in my entire political life people have not accused me of being against women simply because they are women,” he said.
“Not [on] one occasion in my entire public life have people asked me to explain my sexual preferences or priorities or any of my sexual relationships. Not once.”“Not [on] one occasion in my entire public life have people asked me to explain my sexual preferences or priorities or any of my sexual relationships. Not once.”
He said people including former prime minister Paul Keating and former Labor leader Simon Crean had asked him about the comments, with words to the effect of “did Sarah say that?”.
The Greens senator Nick McKim was also called as a witness on Monday. Under cross-examination, Morris asked what Hanson-Yong’s “emotional appearance” was following the debate.The Greens senator Nick McKim was also called as a witness on Monday. Under cross-examination, Morris asked what Hanson-Yong’s “emotional appearance” was following the debate.
He replied: “Normal … to the best of my recollection”.He replied: “Normal … to the best of my recollection”.
“She didn’t come across as in any way upset?” Morris asked.“She didn’t come across as in any way upset?” Morris asked.
“Not that I noticed,” he replied.“Not that I noticed,” he replied.
McKim also agreed that the comments made by Leyonhjelm had not made him think less of Hanson-Young.McKim also agreed that the comments made by Leyonhjelm had not made him think less of Hanson-Young.
“No,” he replied.“No,” he replied.
McKim also agreed that he did not recall hearing from other members of the Australian Greens that Leyonhjelm’s comments about Hanson-Young had led them to be critical of her.McKim also agreed that he did not recall hearing from other members of the Australian Greens that Leyonhjelm’s comments about Hanson-Young had led them to be critical of her.
Sarah Hanson-YoungSarah Hanson-Young
David LeyonhjelmDavid Leyonhjelm
Australian politicsAustralian politics
Kristina KeneallyKristina Keneally
Australian GreensAustralian Greens
newsnews
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content