…. from Mike O’Connor would be wise!

Okay, you BUGgers out there! Hands up if you think Bruce Lehrmann’s decision not to give evidence at his rape trial represented a “dignified silence”?

Hmm. Thought so.

In a half century in journalism, I can’t think of one of my countless colleagues over that journey who would be so stupid as to use that phrase. I’d be bitterly disappointed in them if they did.

Or one who would even go further and talk about Lehrmann’s “bravery, grace and dignity”.

Well, except one. Mike O’Connor, columnist for The Courier-Mail.

O’Connor last week penned the piece (above), largely devoted to making the point that both Lehrmann and Brittany Higgins had suffered much from Lehrmann’s aborted rape trial.

But O’Connor made it fairly plain where most of his sympathies lay. While Higgins adopted a high media profile in the leadup to the trial, Lehrmann had maintained …. here it comes … “a dignified silence”.

Lehrmann had lost a $200,000 job and was now broke. His life had been effectively destroyed; his future uncertain. His right to clear his name dashed.

Lehrmann wasn’t out to cash in on the case like you know who! (Oops, that didn’t age well!)

“What of his mental health and the incredible stress to which he has been subjected?
“What of his bravery, grace and dignity?” O’Connor thundered.

Back in the day, O’Connor wrote funny columns about his ability to trip over his own shadow, sometimes, or maybe often, after drink had been taken.

But sadly things have changed in recent years. He now regularly rates close to 9 on the Houghton scale for rightwing fuckwittery.

He pens articles such as “Who will defend the white Christian male?’ where the few clued-up people among the paper’s dwindling readership understandably looks for the “satire” tag at the top.

In yesterday’s Courier-Mail, he mused on what 2023 will bring, displaying little creativity or cleverness or humour as he appeared to rely on LNP talking points for some of his predictions.

Basically, O’Connor has become an anti-woke warrior, railing against the way the world is headed and the basic values of decency and respect it is losing, meaning far too many stale and useless Labor governments are being re-elected.

But back to the Lehrmann trial. I’d suggest there are other ways to describe his decision not to give evidence. A strategic silence. A defence-counsel ordered silence. A very wise silence considering something nasty sure as hell happened in Linda Reynolds’ office early that morning back in March 2019. Couches don’t get steamcleaned ahead of schedule for no reason.

As O’Connor himself pointed out, then Prime Minister Scott Morrison told Parliament back in February this year: “I’m sorry to Ms Higgins for the terrible things that happened here”.

News overnight suggests the Albanese government has reached the same view.

We all agree that Lehrmann was in his rights to stay silent (maybe that should change?) and, in principle, jurors are supposed to make no bad inferences from that decision.

But jurors do any way. The thought that if a rape accused is innocent he should have the guts to state his case lingers in their minds. Lehrmann’s decision then becomes a gutless silence. An unbrave silence. An ungraceful silence.

It’s why my best bet – formed from when I was covering courts for The Courier-Mail while O’Connor was regaling his readers with the story about what happened when he used a screwdriver the wrong way around or accidentally ran over the Princess of Paddington or some such thing – that Bruce Lehrmann should thank his lucky stars that his trial’s jury deliberations were firstly deadlocked and then abandoned because a juror against the rules brought into the jury room a wad of research papers about the incidence of women falsely claiming rape. We may never know but I’m suspecting it was 11-1, maybe 10-2, to convict.

Or to use another example O’Connor might understand … it’s amazing how quickly that Brisbane jury the other day slotted the mongrel who murdered his girlfriend by setting fire to her house; how quickly and surely justice can be delivered when a juror hasn’t snuck in research papers on how often men who start fires don’t intend to hurt anybody.

The saddest point of O’Connor’s latest effort that registered so strongly on the Houghton scale is that the powers-that-be at The Courier-Mail think this sort of column is the way of securing its long-term future.

These editorial masterminds think the paper’s ageing readership is not only dying but also dying to find out just how badly a rape accused has suffered whenever one of the little womenfolk has the temerity to get her claims to trial.

It’s probably best, then, that young, professional women who know how few of their gender come forward with rape allegations in the first place and then how few of any subsequent trials go their way don’t read the shitrag or the shit columns inside it from a plethora of Newscorpse RWFWs in the first place and never will.

Unless, of course, they bloody well wake up to themselves, do the right thing, drop out of university, get married, stick to the kitchen and their bedroom duties and start voting LNP as nature intended.

Right, Mike O’Connor? Des Houghton? Nick Cater? Peter Gleeson? Sorry, Gleeso. Cheap shot.

Don Gordon-Brown