Producer tried 'to do number' on Lehrmann with 'late' right of reply, court told

"I want to suggest you didn't really want to reach Mr Lehrmann," Matthew Richardson SC, representing Mr Lehrmann, said on Wednesday.

The Project producer Angus Llewellyn denied multiple accusations, calling some "ridiculous", and said he worked to typical journalistic standards.

He is giving evidence in the Federal Court defamation proceedings brought forward by Mr Lehrmann as the key producer on the television story at the centre of the trial.

During cross-examination, Mr Llewellyn also admitted having "no proof" Ms Higgins would lose her job despite the interview's opening line: "A young woman forced to choose between her career and the pursuit of justice."

Mr Lehrmann is suing the Lisa Wilkinson and Network Ten over the 2021 story, which aired Brittany Higgins' claim she was raped inside a ministerial office on an early March 2019 Saturday.

The interview did not name the alleged perpetrator but included details about him which Mr Lehrmann claims clearly identified and defamed him.

Ms Wilkinson and Ten are attempting to prove the allegation made by Ms Higgins is substantially true and they acted reasonably and professionally in reporting it for public interest reasons.

In opposition to this defence, Mr Richardson spent most of Wednesday pressing Mr Llewellyn on his professionalism in putting together the broadcast.

"Mr Llewellyn, I want to suggest to you that the requests that you sent out on the 12th of February were not a genuine effort to obtain information," he asked.

"They were just to cover off The Project for defamation."

The producer denied the claim after earlier stating he was using "humour" to put Ms Higgins at ease when he told her a "reasonable" time to give Mr Lehrmann to respond could be just 10 minutes.

"You were just going through the motions," the barrister said.

Mr Llewellyn responded: "Of course I was not just going through the motions. That's not how I do my job."

Mr Lehrmann has previously told the trial he believed Ten, including Mr Llewellyn, did not make reasonable attempts to reach him for a right of reply ahead of the broadcast.

The court has heard the producer contacted Mr Lehrmann through emails he no longer used or did not check regularly, and through an old work number, three days before, and on the day, The Project aired.

"There were just two people in a room at Parliament House, weren't there?" Mr Richardson said.

"It was critical in those circumstances to try and fairly obtain the other person's side of the story, wasn't it?"

The producer responded: "Absolutely, that's what I did."

He repeatedly stood firm that the three days he gave Mr Lehrmann and other parties, including politicians, to comment or agree to an interview were "very generous" and not purposefully late.

"What I want to suggest to you is that if Mr Lehrmann had told you on [the day of the broadcast] that he was prepared to give you an interview, that it would have been little more than a footnote to the story you'd been working on for several weeks," the barrister said.

The producer denied the suggestion it would have been too difficult to include Mr Lehrmann in the broadcast at late notice.

Earlier, the producer was asked about Ms Higgins' fiancé David Sharaz, who had provided him with the contacts to reach Mr Lehrmann.

"Did it occur to you that Ms Higgins' partner might not be the best person to source contact details for the man she was accusing of rape?" Mr Richardson asked.

Mr Llewellyn described Ms Higgins and Mr Sharaz as "excellent sources of very reliable information".

In a pre-production meeting with Mr Llewellyn and Ms Wilkinson, Mr Sharaz said he wanted the story to break during a sitting week and ahead of senate estimates so Liberal politicians could be probed publicly.

"You knew Mr Sharaz intended to assist the then-opposition in pursing this issue in parliament?" the barrister said.

Mr Llewellyn replied: "Maybe".

"Is that a serious answer?" Justice Lee, interrupting, asked.

Mr Richardson then asked the producer if Mr Sharaz had a "political agenda".

While Mr Llewellyn first dodged answering the question, but pressed by the judge to respond, the producer said: "I don't think he had a political agenda".

"It wasn't about a political agenda, it was about raising an issue in parliament," he said.

Texts have revealed Ms Wilkinson described Brittany Higgins' Parliament House rape allegation as an "extraordinary coverup" when she first pitched it.

"I have an explosive political story for Sunday Project ... we're going huge with it," the journalist told Mr Llewellyn in January 2019, according to the man's affidavit.

He responded: "Sounds intriguing! ... I can jump on it from Friday if needed?"

"It is an extraordinary coverup involving Linda Reynolds, Michaelia Cash and the PMO," Ms Wilkinson said.

MORE TRIAL COVERAGE:

"The woman at the centre of it all is ready to talk. She is based in Canberra. We can fly her up. Would you be good for a meeting with her on Monday?"

Under cross-examination, Mr Llewellyn has been asked why he didn't seek hard evidence to prove Ms Higgins' job was at risk, as she claimed in her television interview.

The broadcast was played for the court before Mr Richardson described Ms Higgins' account of the pressure put as her as having "serious inconsistencies".

"She was unable to articulate anything that had been said or done that put her under pressure not to go to police," the barrister said.

Mr Llewellyn disagreed and said a meeting at Parliament House with chief of staff Fiona Brown and Senator Linda Reynolds "put her under pressure".

Ms Higgins has said the two women supported her reporting the allegation in the meeting, days after the alleged rape, but that it felt like they were "ticking a box".

She later claims she felt like she would lose her jobs if she went to police and became a "liability".

But the producer could not point to any physical evidence of this allegation.

"Are you saying that at the time the program was broadcast, you had - to use your words - no proof of an allegation that she was being told that if she proceeded with police charges ... that she'd lose her job," Justice Michael Lee asked him.

"I did not have proof," Mr Llewellyn responded.

Mr Lehrmann has already received hundreds of thousands of dollars in defamation suit payouts from the ABC and News Corp over their reporting and broadcast of the rape allegation.

He has always denied raping Ms Higgins and no findings have been made against him.

His criminal trial was aborted last October due to juror misconduct, with the charge levelled at him later discontinued over concerns for Ms Higgins' mental health.

The defamation trial continues.