Cross-examination is never pretty.
And that was never more true than this week in the Federal Court, when former Liberal staffer Bruce Lehrmann's defamation case was forced to pause for a few minutes as Brittany Higgins choked on a sob in the witness box.
Network Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC rose to say quietly he was concerned for her welfare, and the court took a break from a day of intense questioning.
Ms Higgins was distressed by suggestions she had made up allegations she'd been sexually assaulted by Mr Lehrmann at Parliament House, after inconsistencies in her account were exposed.
But that's the nature of cross-examination — find the holes, undo the narrative and undermine the credibility of the person in the stand.
And both Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann have felt the sting of being undone by an interrogation during the case.
This all began in March 2019, when Ms Higgins alleges she was raped by Mr Lehrmann at Parliament House in Canberra, on a couch inside the office of Senator Linda Reynolds — the pair's boss at the time.
Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann had been drinking with others at a local bar, The Dock, and then gone to a nightclub with colleagues before heading back to the office in the early hours of the morning.
It has always been an extraordinary case.
But perhaps the most extraordinary part of the tale has been playing out in the Federal Court this week, as Mr Lehrmann tries to sue Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, over an interview with Ms Higgins on The Project in 2021, when she made her allegation.
It has had its paparazzi moments, as cameras scrambled each day to capture Ms Higgins, Wilkinson and Mr Lehrmann arriving with their lawyers.
And thousands have been glued to the Federal Court's YouTube channel, watching on in numbers other streaming services would envy.
A trial re-run
The hearing was to have been something of a re-run of Mr Lehrmann's criminal trial, which was abandoned last year due to juror misconduct, meaning there are no findings against him.
The defamation case was to be run that way, because Network Ten and Wilkinson need Ms Higgins's evidence as they seek to prove truth in their reporting as a defence.
But so far it has been much more, with some of the key evidence unravelling.
To start with, Mr Lehrmann has faced a thorough and gruelling cross-examination — something he avoided in the criminal trial by maintaining his right to silence as a defendant.
That's not to say no one has heard his version of events.
His police interview was played to the jury during that trial and this year he has featured in two television specials about the case.
Now, in court and under oath, he has also had the opportunity to explain inconsistencies in his story, including admissions he had lied.
The trial heard he told police he'd returned to Parliament House on the night in 2019 to collect his keys, but he told security staff that he was there to collect documents, and his chief of staff that he and Brittany Higgins had gone there to drink whisky and indeed had two glasses.
He told the Federal Court the correct version was that he needed to retrieve his keys, and, while in the office, had also made notes he believed to be of future use to Senator Reynolds.
Mr Lehrmann explained to the court that he had lied to security guards because he felt the need to give a more substantial reason than to collect his keys.
"I thought that security would have said, 'Bugger off and come back next week' and I needed to get home," Mr Lehrmann said.
Even the whisky excuse didn't hold water.
He had previously told police he didn't have alcohol in the office.
That was undone this week, when Network Ten's barrister produced a picture of several bottles on his desk.
Bruce Lehrmann's mind went 'blank'
Loading...The most dramatic concession Mr Lehrmann made was that he had bought at least two drinks for Ms Higgins at The Dock — the Canberra pub the pair had attended with others earlier in the night.
This was after he told the court he was struggling to remember details about the night, and that his mind was "blank".
The court was shown CCTV footage which depicted Mr Lehrmann buying the drinks while Ms Higgins was with him at the bar, and paying for them with a card.
"I apologise, I was wrong," he said.
But he denied deliberately setting out to get Ms Higgins drunk.
The court also heard that about a fortnight after the alleged assault, Mr Lehrmann missed a meeting at Parliament House with then-chief of staff Fiona Brown to discuss his employment.
In response to a subsequent email from Senator Reynolds, Mr Lehrmann said he had "retreated to Queensland" to see his mother, who was dealing with health issues at the time.
He conceded that was untrue, and while he had "serious plans" to visit her, he had spent the entire period in either Canberra or Sydney.
Brittany Higgins and the dress
Brittany Higgins is seen in CCTV footage at The Dock and later arriving at Parliament House, in a white cocktail dress.
The dress has been front and centre of questions by Mr Lehrmann's barrister Steve Whybrow during her cross-examination this week.
Initially, Ms Higgins maintained that, when she woke in Senator Reynolds's office in the morning, hungover and ill, her dress was around her waist.
But a female security guard who looked into the room maintained she was naked, something she now concedes may be true.
"I have accepted the evidence to the contrary of that," Ms Higgins said.
"You are accepting you are wrong about the dress?" Mr Whybrow asked.
"In relation to whether the dress was on my body or on the ground, yes. In relation to being physically raped, no," Ms Higgins said.
Ms Higgins also responded to questions about why she had decided to wear the same dress again at a birthday function for Senator Reynolds months after the alleged assault.
"It was my favourite dress, I used to wear it all the time, and I guess I was trying to reclaim it," Ms Higgins told the court.
"I thought maybe I could disassociate it from the rape, but I never could."
Ms Higgins also faced questioning about a bruise on her leg that she said she suffered during the alleged sexual assault.
Under cross-examination in the Federal Court, she has now conceded it could have been caused by a fall at the nightclub where she had gone with Mr Lehrmann and two others after The Dock.
There were other discrepancies in Ms Higgins's evidence, but it was suggestions from Mr Whybrow that the alleged offence never happened that proved a flashpoint.
"You didn't have sex with anyone that night, you passed out drunk in the minister's suite," Mr Whybrow said at one point.
Ms Higgins rejected the suggestion out of hand saying, it was "insulting" and "incorrect".
On Friday, Mr Whybrow also took aim at Ms Higgins's arrangements with the media, suggesting she had been out to damage the Liberal Party at the federal election, due about a year later.
It's a claim Ms Higgins denied.
"I had no intention of impacting the election, but I did want to change the culture of Parliament House," Ms Higgins said.
And the cross-examination is not over yet, with Mr Whybrow set to continue his questioning of Ms Higgins next week.
There will be no hearing on Monday, with the case returning to the Federal Court on Tuesday morning.