Consortium News Profile picture
Sep 28, 2020 85 tweets 21 min read Read on X
DAY 15 of the #ulianAssange extradition hearing is about to begin. Our live tweets will be on this thread.

Join us at 5pm BST for Joe Lauria @unjoe's live report on the day's proceedings.

As we wait for Judge Baraitser to arrive, we see that lawyer Yancey Ellis is waiting to testify. His practice appears to be based in Alexandria Virginia.

All stand...
We will hear from a representative from the press association. Fitzgerald says the defence has been unable to take instruction from Mr #Assange, so they want to hear Mr Ellis's testimony first

Before that, judge is reading the application from the press, who want more disclosure
Judge is reading from a ruling by Supreme Court judge Lady Hale. Acc to the principle of open justice, the press has no automatic right to full disclosure. They must cite a good reason & it is up to the court to grant it, especially regarding a defendant's right to privacy.
Any tech issue that impedes open justice must be addressed as a separate issue & the judge must tend to the matter.

Judge refers to specifics of Mr #Assange's medical condition. Both the defence & prosecution agree that the full medical notes do not need to be handed to press.
Statements read in open court may be released. The problem for the press is that arguments from witnesses have been hard to follow, but the judge rules that Mr #Assange's right to privacy takes precedence. Application refused.
Yancy Ellis will now testify. He has made 2 statements, in Dec 2019 & July 14 2020. 15 years a lawyer. Formerly served in a legal capacity in the marines. Now practices in Alexandria Virginia, & is very familiar w/ the Adult Correctional Facility
Says #Assange will be heard there
Mr Manafort, Ms Bettina & @xychelsea were held there.
Lawyer Yancy Ellis says #Assange could be held at ADC in the Administrative Segregation unit (X-Block) as pre-trial defendant for months or years. High profile defendants are always kept away from everyone else.
Ellis has been in ADC's X-Block. Lawyers get a pass to go lawyer-attorney rooms.
Cells very small. Room for bed, mat, metal toilet & not much else. Inmates get out for 1-2 hrs/day. This often happens in the middle of the night. X-Block prisoners have minimal to no social contact.
ADC X-Block is effectively solitary confinement. Even difficult for lawyers to communicate with clients in their cells. They have shout. If food tray closed, almost impossible to communicate w/ other prisoners. They are never taken on breaks at same time.
Ellis disagrees with Assistant Attorney General Gordon Kromberg's description of prison conditions. For Ad-Seg prisoners there's no difference from solitary confinement. Special Administrative Measures (SAMS) would add restrictions on top of that.
EF So the normal Ad-Seg measures without SAMS, can one make phone calls?

YE Yes, during the 1-2 hour break

EF What would be the impact for someone suffering psychological disability.

YE There's no doctor. Limited treatment. Insufficient monitoring on medication or treatment.
YE They usually just put a special suit on someone who is talking about suicide. Take away shoelaces etc - anything they could kill themselves with.

In principle my access was permitted but it was practically very difficult to get in there. No guards because everyone locked down
Lewis: You say Kromberg's statement about ADC was inaccurate or incomplete.

JL How many prisoners?
YE A few hundred

JL Have you iTV wardens or medical staff?
YE It's a jail.
JL Have you ITVd psychologist or psychiatrist who attends jail?
YE No
JL speaking of inspection by US Marshall each year. Checks medical treatment, services. According to Kromberg, the last visit was August 2019 & Marshalls found it to be in compliance with policy.

JL No successful suicides.
YE Yes they have a good record w/ people not succeeding
YE has requested records of assessment but has not been able to obtain them.

JL Kromberg says AD-Seg prisoners have access to programs.
YE That is not the case. The idea of AD-Seg is that prisoners are kept away from everyone else.
Lewis: Were you asked to use the term solitary confinement in your report.
YE No. I was asked how many hours in cell & if any contact w/ others.

Lewis Is it solitary if prisoners can see a lawyer?
YE On all other days, yes.
Lewis You say if someone suicidal due to mental health issues you would be treated in special unit.

YE Some of my clients were sent to a psychiatric hospital.

Lewis You say #Assange is likely to be placed in upper Ad-Seg.

YE Yes upstairs is for permanent Ad-Seg
Lewis Do you know if Mr #Assange will be deemed a security risk?
YE No. They generally don't put high-profile prisoners in with the others.

Lewis: Hasn't there been a lot of public interest & support for #Assange

YE Yes for interest. I can't speak for support
Lewis: Won't Mr #Assange's many lawyers be looking after him
YE: ADC does not give special treatment to anyone. They can try to object to conditions but I don't know what that would do.
Fitzgerald (Defence): Your statement is based on extensive experience

YE Yes. If your trail is going to take a long time, X-Block is the only option for certain prisoners, esp high profile

You spoke of Paul Manafort, Maria Butina & @xychelsea who attempted suicide.
YE She did
Yancey Ellis Based on my experience, high-profile inmates like #Assange, who also have mental health problems are typically placed in Administrative Segregation.
20 minutes break, during which the defence will take instruction. The next witness will be Joel Sickler, who has worked in the field of sentencing and corrections for more than 30 years and currently heads the Justice Advocacy Group LLC.
While awaiting the testimony of Joel Sickler, some information on him and the Justice Advocacy Group.

justiceadvocacygroupllc.com/meet-joel-sick…
We gather fm Yancy Ellis's statement that Asst. Attorney General Gordon Kromberg may have been describing prison conditions for the general population. Whether he believes #Assange would be segregated or not is not public information & he will not face X-examination by defence.
We learn fm Joel Sickler's background that he worked as a graduate fellow at a large maximum-security penitentiary that served the District of Columbia. Active in the officer’s union, he created and led a corrections officer task force that promoted alternatives to incarceration.
Joel Sickler's idea was to promote community-based sentencing and treatment programs for offenders who posed no public safety risk - to lessen overcrowding, create better, safer working conditions & to spare some offenders, mostly youths, from the violent prison experience.
Joel Sickler has taken the stand. 2 statements, in Jan & July 2020. Heads the Justice Advocacy Group in Alexandria Virginia. Advices Bureau of Prisons. Has had a lot of clients in Alexandria detention centre (ADC).

Says #Assange will be placed in Ad-Seg, in his opinion
JS Reason why #Assange will be segregated:
1/ ADC has a legacy of placing detainees in Ad-Seg if their crimes are anything to do with security;
2/based on his notoriety;
3/ to protect him from other inmates.

Cell is less than 8 X 10 feet, acc to lawyers & inmates
JS #Assange would have little or no contact w/ other inmates. If SAMS imposed, absolutely no contact
It is ridiculous to say inmates can converse through bars

No access to outside world ex monitored phone calls & some visits by lawyers.

"Your whole world is the 4 walls of cell"
JS I have read extensive literature about the effect of SAMS.
I do have a client at Colorado ADX who is extremely restricted. Judge can orders. He was convicted in 1998. Still under these conditions after 22 years w/ no end in sight.

ADX is where #Assange would go if convicted
Joel Sickler: Over a dozen of my clients have committed suicide in pre-trial detention. If they are determined to do it, it can be done.

Assange would be most likely placed in Ad-SEG under SAMS at ADC pre-trial detention. If SAMS he will probably go on to ADX under SAMS.
JS #Assange if convicted & sent to Colorado ADX under SAMS, he will be placed in a very small cell, most likely indefinitely. No contact w/ other prisoners. My understanding of the rules is that he could call family once a month for 15 minutes.
EF Can one appeal against SAMS at ADX?
JS It is well-known that even the minorest of appeals are rejected. I have filed over 1000 and have only had success about a dozen times. Some of my colleagues have had no success.
EF Is there an upper limit to the time you can spend in ADX SAMS?
JS It's usually indefinitely but there's a step-down program. But if Mr #Assange is given a life, it's pointless to apply.
EF Is everything better after the Cunningham litigation?
JS Nominal changes for general population. Nothing for SAMS

JS Assange will be classified as a high-security prisoner. SAMS will seal his fate. If not ADX it will be another restricted communications facility.
JS ADX prisoners are heavily medicated. It all sounds great on paper about how these people are treated, but the reality is a different thing. Federal prisons say only 3% of inmates have mental health problems but that doesn't ring true. It's over 30% in state prisons.
JS Significant risk that #Assange will get no treatment for mental health issues at ADX Colorado.
Prosecution asks what Mr Sickler does. He lists his duties of preparing clients for what they are about to face, advising on how they can reduce their sentence, advocates on their behalf.

Sickler has worked in penitentiary with 3000 convicted felons
Sickler mainly focuses on advocacy in terms of sentencing.
He has never been an inspector, but looks at medical & conduct records every day.

Ms Dobbin asks if he has records to prisoner records across the board. He says no but can access records. Also employs medical consultants
Dobbin asks Sickler if his medical consultants are psychiatrists. He says no.

Sickler says none of his clients have been subjected to SAMS, but a number to SAMS-like conditions.

Sickler has not been inside the unit where #Assange would be held but many lawyers have described it
Dobbin reprimanding Sickler because his experience of inside #Assange's possible cell is not first hand. She refers him to Gordon Kromberg's statement. Asks if Sickler that there may be good reason to place #Assange in protective custody. He does.
Sickler asked if he agrees w/ Kromberg that if under AD-Seg he would be able to avail himself programs and speak w/ other prisoner under Ad-Seg. Yes.

He agrees that only Attorney General can oder SAMs & posits that the intelligence community would weigh in.
Dobbin informs Sickler that only people who would be a risk to national security. She is making the point that very few are placed under SAMs, and they MAY include extreme restrictions. It is therefore speculative how they may be applied, Dobbin asserts.
Dobbin cites the case of Wadih El-Hage, key aide to Osama Bin Laden. Even he was not completely isolated...
Dobbin for the prosecution is discrediting Joel Sickler's testimony as hearsay.

We break for lunch and he will be back.
Would the case of the secretary to Osama Bin Laden, Wadhi el-Hage (who was not placed under SAMS), be comparable for the intelligence community to that of #Assange? The issue is the risk of damaging national security information being transmitted to other prisoners.
Dobbins going through specifics of SAMs conditions at ADC. Access to family, access to lawyers. She says it is the same level of lawyer access for all.
Sickler says lawyers currently contact inmates via video & but there are delays for technical reasons.
Dobbins is challenging a claim by Sickler that defending prisoners under SAMs is onerous for lawyers because they too could face prosecution over public pronouncements. She mentions a case where information was conveyed to terrorists.
Dobbin makes the point that ADX is under-populated. Cites Kromberg's list of medical staff. Sickler agrees but says there is often a long wait & no real psychiatric intervention. When someone is severely depressed they are simply medicated.
Sickler mentions Jeffrey Epstein's suicide. Says he was one of the most closely watched inmates. Dobbin says two officers were indicted. Sickler replies that doesn't bring him back.

Dobbin asks him about @xychelsea's attempted suicide. He says conditions are arduous, torturous
Sickler: Even the healthiest inmates report extremely negative effects of prolonged isolation. He concedes that ADC have "stellar record" for preventing successful suicide.
Dobbin reads reports of prisoners on SAMs in 2012, found to be compliant w/ fair trial. Asks if anything has changed re SAMs since then? He says no.

Dobbin discussing post-conviction conditions. The state of Israel said it had confidence in the level of medical care provides.
Sickler replies that Bureau of Prisons had basically paralysed the inmate in question.

Dobbin You can't say whether #Assange would get SAMs

JS The state thinks #Assange has NatSec info. He will be placed under SAMs or have his communications severely restricted.
Dobbin: You were a consultant in the Reality Winner case. She got 63 months?

Sickler: That was a plea. But she is in no way the same kind of prisoner as Assange.

Dobbin: She was designated to a medical centre & mental health counselling.
Sickler: Most defendants need that
Dobbin: Your report refers continuously to ppl in solitary confinement. She lists various kinds of housing. "Most inmates are double-celled".

Cramming 2 ppl into tiny cells is very difficult. Some ppl end up alone. Others get beaten up by cell mates.
Dobbin lists more variations of housing, some relating to violent prisoners. Now moves on to ADX. The 1st step is a decision abt where & how someone should be placed. That's where you come in, right?
Sickler: Yes. In ADX my recommendations given some weight, but many ppl decide
Sickler is saying that decision are made at the highest levels in Washington re the placement of inmates.

Dobbin Are you aware ppl w/ mental illness will not be housed at ADX unless an exceptional security risk?

JS They make all kinds of exceptions.
Dobbins: Do you agree that family members can visit ppl under SAMs?

Sickler: If they can get there, & visits are very rare. How often will Mr #Assange receive family visits under SAMs at ADX.

Dobbins cites a terrorist, Mr Mutalab, who is allowed visits.
Dobbin citing other possibilities for Multalab to communicate w/ others.
Sickler: It seems 2 family members can visit. I don't know how often. In general prison conditions 20 family members can.
Dobbin: You say #Assange will be kept indefinitely in H unit? How do you know that?
Sickler: When is no longer being a threat to national security?Based on 40 years experience. I have a client kept under SAMs-like conditions (isolation) for 22 years.
Dobbin talking about step-down program at ADX.
Sickler says that can't happen until after 2 years, but if the Attorney General designates #Assange won't be eligible.
Dobbin says that is not the case.

JS: Well it's just so arduous. If you're saying there's a possibility of relief
Dobbin details the 3-phase Step-down program.
Sickler: It sounds awful, even w/ the privileges
Dobbin: But you accept how someone can progress though the 3-phase program & eventually out of ADX?
Dobbin: Do you know how many have been taken off SAMS since 2012?
JS: I don't think there's any debate how deleterious the conditions at ADX are. Even the wardens say that.

Dobbin will move on to medical care at ADX.
SAMS does not prevent health care, or hospitalisation?
No
Dobbin asks if Sickler can offer an opinion about changes in conditions since the Cunningham litigation.
JS: No

Dobbin: Increased access to psychology services. ADX Florence has more mental health staff than any other prisons.
Sickler: It's the conditions that necessitate this.
Dobbin: So there are lots of staff & effective treatment?
Sickler: I don't know if it's effective.
Dobbin: How many w/ mental health problems were moved out of ADX as a result of the Cunningham settlement.
JS: Over 100. No one on SAMs
Dobbin: So new policies were introduced re the treatment of mental illness in prisons.
Sickler: Yes, the policies were written, but they mainly applied for people w/ schizophrenia.

Dobbin: Have conditions improved at ADX re mental health?
Sickler: Not in a position to say
Dobbin: You refer to the Chapman case when you say conditions weren't met at ADX re standard of care.

Sickler: That was abt physical health.
Dobbin: The doctors lost their appeal when they claimed immunity. That paved the way for a trial. The judge ruled in favour of claimants.
Dobbin: You understand there will be a trial
Sickler: Unless there's a settlement
Dobbin: You understand there's been a decrease in the number of prisoners at ADX and a ratio of staff members to prisoners of 8:1?
Sickler: Yes
Dobbin: I'm going to refer to reports you cite...
Dobbin: In 20214, b4 Cunningham settlement, there were a significant number of prisoners who wanted to remain at ADX.
It was clear in the report that the staff knew the prisoners very well.
Sickler: That's extraordinary. Must be such a wonderful place, if ppl don't want to leave
Dobbin: The 2014 report's recommendations... The BOP disputed the finding of under-diagnosis by the inspector because the sample size was too small.

Sickler: Yes they rejected what the inspector reported.
Dobbin: The 2017 made a lot of recommendations. The BOP adopted almost all
Dobbin Can you see almost all recommendations were adopted?
Sickler I just can't see it happening
Sickler has been trying to say the conditions create mental health problems. Cites mentally ill prisoner who was severely beaten. "What I see in practice doesn't match their reports"
Sickler: I have a client who is with-drawing from substance abuse. There is a problem w/ the particular substance he needs so they are giving him nothing.
Dobbin: When it comes to anti-depressants or sedatives there's no difficulty?
Sickler It may take time, but no.
Sickler I agree that policies are place, but I disagree that they are followed on a day-to-day basis. I see 100s of cases where the system fails my clients.

Dobbin How ppl that you treat are unfit for trial?
Sickler Not many. I have dozens who need hospitalisation but won't.
Dobbin: Why are successful suicides less common in the BOP institutions than state institutions.
Sickler: They are well funded. The security is higher
Dobbin: Dr Luke Feld cites the number of positions being created by BOP.
Sickler: I was glad to read more staff being employed
Sickler: If staffing is increasing that's good
Dobbin: Would you agree 80 psychologists is significant
Sickler: Yes
Dobbin: You say what has changed since Ahmed 2010 is the use of Communication Management Units.
Sickler: There are various levels of confinement at CMUs
Dobbin: People in CMUs are not in solitary confinement, they just have their communications restricted?

Sickler: Correct, at various levels.

Dobbin asks about a line above his signature, if he wrote it.
Sickler: No, I thought that was pro forma.
Re-examination of Joel Sickler.
Fitzgerald: Despite the long cross-examination do you still stand by your conclusions that there is a high risk of Assange committing suicide, that will be isolated and for a long time?
JS Yes
EF Do you trust the sources of info u rely on?
JS Yes
Sickler: There will be no meaningful social interaction for Mr Assange. You can scream & no one hears you.

EF: You stand by the reasons you cited why #Assange will be placed under SAMs

Sickler: Yes, especially for the national security reason
Sickler: There is a real risk of SAMs for #Assange
EF : You were challenged on whether SAMs inmates were indefinitely isolated during pre-trial. Does the E-Hage example invalidate your statement?

Sickler: No, also after sentencing courts have no more say.
EF: During phase 1 of step down from SAMs it euphemistically says "Inmates recreate individually". What does that mean?

Sickler: They walk into a small court alone.
EF: Is it yr experience that ppl want to stay?
JS: No, I have a client who is begging to get out of there. They seem to cherry-pick who they want to interview, but some inmates may have become completely institutionalised.
JS I've had some clients who have died in prison who should have been given compassionate release; a handful who have committed suicide & 100s who have not received proper health treatment - and that is documented.
You said medium & high security prisons were very dangerous places. How so?
JS If you are a police informant or sex offender, sentences at those prisons can be lethal. High-profile prisoners face serious threats & extortion. Whitey Bulger was stabbed to death on 1st day.
Tomorrow's witnesses will be Maureen Baird & Lindsey Lewis. More long cross-examinations to be expected.

The press want transcripts. Judge says she is not the owner & it is up to defence & prosecution. Arrangements will be made however for delivery of the ruling on disclosure.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Consortium News

Consortium News Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Consortiumnews

Feb 11
Last day of witness testimony for Lattouf v. ABC will begin in about 30 minutes. Live updates will be on this thread and the proceedings will be live-streamed from the Federal Court of Australia on this link: Image
Yesterday ended with the former ABC Chair Ita Buttrose claiming she had nothing to do with @antoinette_news' sacking, despite evidence of a number of emails she sent to subordinates that appeared to apply pressure for this outcome.

She stated in court: "I'm not happy and I wasn't happy. I didn't wish her to be removed. I didn't put pressure on anybody. It's a fantasy of your own imagination. I have nothing to do with her dismissal".Image
Court in session.

Judge: A media organisation has published information that was subject to a suppression order. I ask that this organisation consider their position & avoid further action.

Announcement of document that has arrived.
Next witness with be Elizabeth Green (direct manager of Lattouf). There is an objection to a part of her affidavit, starting with "this is because...". Judge reads & Lattouf lawyer objects on relevance. What is revenant is what she said or intended to say in a meeting.

Judge: Isn't that favourable for you

LL: Potentially but what is relevant is what preceded her characterisation of what she said.

Judge: I will provisionally let that evidence be led & we can deal with the matter in closing submissions.

Green takes the stand. Confirms her name & position as producer of Sydney 'Drive' show.

LL refers Green to her affidavit.

EG: It's details of a Teams meeting + screenshot I took.

Barrister Philip Boncardo for Lattouf: Did you see complaints about AL?

EG: Yes

PB: Were you told they were from lobby groups?
EG: No, not that I recall.

PB: Re conversations with Ahern. he asked you to look at AL's post. Did you know they about Israel-Palestine?

EG: Yes

PB asks about specifics of what EG said to Lattouf about social media posting & about communication to Ms McBean, legal council.

EG: I said she should be mindful, avoid posting anything about Israel-Palestine.

PB: AL had asked if she had done anything wrong
EG: I told her she was doing a good job, but keep a low profile on social media.

PB: Did you tell Lattouf she should not post anything that might appear unbalanced or not impartial.

EG: Yes

PB: Nothing about Israel-Palestine?

EG: yes I believe so

PB: You said it was OK to post anything factual and from a verified organisation?

EG: Yes

PB: Nothing controversial?

EG: Yes

PB: You got an email from AL outlining what was OK to post & you forwarded this to Ahern. And you both OKd this?

EG: Yes

PB: You gave Lattouf good feedback on her show?

EG: Yes

PB: You were copied in on an email sent by Ahern detailing why AL was on the show.

EG: Yes

PB: When you learned of an intention to dismiss AL you raised an objection that there was nothing wrong with her post?

EG: yes

PB: You were at the dismissal meeting with Ahern & Lattouf where it was explained she had breached the social media policy. Did AL say she had discussed what was OK with you?

EG: Yes

PB: Al was crying & you spent time with here. You said you were sorry & had tried to stop this, but it was coming from higher up?

EG: yes

PB: AL asked if it was about the @hrw post & you said it was about it not being balanced.

EG: Yes

PB: And she said: "How can you balance starvation (as a 'weapon of war')?

EG: I don't recall that.

PB: You said you would love AL to work at the ABC again.

EG: Yes

PB: You made notes, saying you had heard the decision came from Mr Anderson. Heard from whom?

EG: Mr Ahern

PB: You note a conference call with Ben Latimer

EG: Yes.
Read 9 tweets
Feb 10
Lattouf v. ABC will resume in the Federal Court of Australia in about 20 minutes time & we'll hear from five witnesses over the two days. Updates are on this thread & the proceedings can be viewed on this link.

Image
@antoinette_news Day Six of Lattouf v. ABC in session. Judge makes announcement about violations of the confidentiality of complainants' names & addresses - and the uploading of unredacted material to the publicly available online files. ABC lawyer apologises for the human error.
@antoinette_news Today we will hear from Ahern, Buttrose & Green. Statement from ABC: does not deny the existence of the Lebanese race or ethnic extraction & that Ms Lattouf is Lebanese. Does deny this has anything to do with her dismissal.
Read 10 tweets
Feb 6
Our DAY FIVE reporting on the Lattouf v. ABC case will be on this thread and starting at 9.30am AEDT, the proceedings can be viewed via this link ⬇️
Image
We arrived at a point yesterday where David Anderson, the Managing Director of the ABC (Australia's national broadcaster) testified that @antoinette_news' mention of "Illegally occupied territories" of #Gaza could be interpreted as anti-semitic hate speech.

The Australian journalists' union @withMEAA has since issued a statement about outside interference that may have influenced such views within the ABC.Image
Court in session. Calling Christopher Nicolas Oliver-Taylor (O-T), Chief Content Officer (COT) for ABC.

Changes since affidavit - resigned from ABC.

Screenshot shown from Teams meeting

Oshie Fagir: You took a religious oath

O-T: Yes, I'm Catholic
OF: Do you know what a managed exit is?
O-T: No
OF: Do you use Signal & did you communicate about Ms Lattouf over Signal
O-T: Yes & yes, with Mr Latimer

OF reads O-T's job description - ensures compliance for editorial policies (EdPols) - - formerly over 1K people

OF - Do you understand EdPols govern on air content, and then there are Guidelines for personal use of social media & ABC distinguishes the two?

O-T Yes, but it depends on the circumstances?

OF- So personal social media activity is not ABC content & not subject to EdPols. Agree?

O-T Yes, but impartiality can come into play

OF: You were also bound by EdPols?

O-T: Yes

OF draws O-T's attention to the subject of misconduct = where employee disobeys a reasonable and lawful direction.

OF You understand the difference between direction, request and suggestion?

O-T: Yes

OF: The way Ms Lattouf (AL) was dealt with was highly abnormal. Agree?

O-T: No

OF: Ms Green was AL's line manager. Wasn't it unusual for you & ABC's MD to be involved in scrutinising the conduct of a 5-day casual employee? You disagreed.

O-T: Nods

OF: Social media misconduct should have nothing to do with EdPols or the COT, but be managed by line manager.

O-T: Not unless the MD refers it to COT. It was managed by line manager but others involved to.

OF: When did you consult with people in Culture?
O-T: I did not

OF: You understood that Lattouf was not a high profile personality?
O-T: Yes

OF: You were aware of her race & national extraction?
O-T: No

OF: You see this email you wrote, where you say she is a Lebanese Christian?

O-T: I copy/pasted this content from Mr Ahern...

OF: Of course you knew. Were you confused by this? You understand that there is a race called Lebanese Christian?

ABC lawyer: Objection

Judge asks O-T to leave the room

OF reminds judge that Fair Work Act permits use of race as a national or ethnic category

OF to O-T: You understand Lattouf was Lebanese?
O-T: I wasn't really aware of all the content of my email send to MD Anderson.

OF: You just copy/paste content to email and send?
O-T: In some cases. The criteria. for Lattouf's selection were put together by someone else.

OF: You understood Lattouf's position on the Israel-Gaza war before she was hired?

O-T: More as the week continued. I don't know if I understood her position but I knew there were published comments relating to question of partiality as a host of a live radio show.

OF: You understood when you caused her to be removed from the air that Lattouf held a view that media orgs should report ethically on Israel-Palestine?

O-T: I didn't know she held that view

OF refers to O-T sent to Ahern & Latimer, questioning her suitability for the job because of her position on Israel-Palestine & because she signed a petition.

OF: You knew her political stance when you fired her, that she was critical of the State of Israel?

O-T: No

OF: You knew she had signed a petition calling for ethical reporting on the war?

O-T: It wasn't about that, She wasn't supposed to post anything during her period of employment

OF: He dismissal was precipitated by a social media post? When did you become aware of that?
O-T: Yes. during a Teams meeting,. It was a slide shared by Mr Latimer

OF: You gave evidence at the Fair Work Commission that you had never seen that post. O-T says his memory is not clear.

OF moves on to the week of Lattouf's dismissal. O-T says he was looking at ways she could be kept on air.

OF refers to correspondence about Lattouf. There is no indication here that you saw her posts relating to diversity of voices and Israel's use of starvation as a weapon of war. Correct?

O-T: I can't recall. I believe I was told by Mr Latimer

OF reads from O-T affidavit, questions the use of language defining partiality. Asks if those are lawyer's words or his.

O-T: I don't know how to answer that
OF : You understand there is an obligation for ABC employees to be impartial. On what issues?
O-T: That's a broad question but if you're a live radio host you should be impartial, there are some topics where it becomes difficult to hold personal view.

OF: The obligation applies at all times or only at work
O-T: It depends on the circumstances

OF: And if you are radio host, it applies to all subject matter? Did you understand that when Lattouf was employed by ABC she should be impartial on all subject matter at all times?

O-T: No? (O-T speaking very quietly)

OF: Lattouf was hosting the 'Mornings' show and it was a (politically) light show. That her work was not related to the Israel-Gaza war?

O-T: Yes, but there were news breaks & that was the hottest news story at the time.

OF: You wrote "her work is not related to the Israel-Gaza war. You knew the content of 'Mornings' was significantly watered down coming up to Christmas.

OF: You knew Lattouf did not present the news. That was a completely different person & different department. Correct?

O-T: Yes

OF: Was Lattouf sacked for breaching a direction?
O-T: Yes, and was not impartial - and this could have affected perception of her impartiality on air.

OF: Who gave the direction not to pst on social media

O-T: I believe it was Mr Ahern
OF: Because she was known to have certain opinions about the Israel-Gaza War?

O-T: I was told that
OF: What was her view?
O-T: I'm not sure
OF: You took a decision without knowing anything about her views?
O-T: I'm not an expert on the issues. I was told there was a problem related to impartiality.
OF: You knew complaints were made by a pro-Israel lobby?
O-T: I knew there had been a number of complaints. I don't believe I knew it was a lobby. It was by people who held a different view to Ms Lattouf. That was clear.

OF: You understood that the complaints were about her position on the Israel-Gaza war.

O-T: Yes
OF: You have been instructed not to acknowledge Ms Lattouf's position & just use the catch-phrase "impartiality", right?

O-T: I don't agree with that statement.

OF On Dec 18, did you know who Lattouf was?
O-T: I don't think so
OF: Did Anderson know her?
O-T: I don't know sir
OF: You knew complaints were about her position on the war?
O-T: Yes, Mr Anderson told me
OF: And you told Mr Ahern to seek advice Latimer & Saska?
O-T: Yes they were the experts on subject matter

OF: On what basis has the ABC authority to forbid Lattouf from expressing her views?

O-T: Our concern about impartiality
OF You note Latimer's advice that the ABC could not expect a casual presenter's view to be consistent with ABC policy at all times? You agree with that?

O-T: Yes
OF: And you note Melkman's comments about her Crikey article, that it was clearly journalistic work?

OF: Yes
O-T: You agreed with Melkman's view (as acting editorial director)?
O-T: Yes

OF You then get an email from Ahern & see mention of Lattouf's views on the Israel-Gaza war. Did you read it?

O-T: Briefly
OF: You had a lot of emails about this. Was it a priority issue?
O-T: Yes but it wasn't about something I knew much about.

OF: Your affidavit speaks of what was in your mind the week of the dismissal.
O-T: There were lots of things going on. I was running 9 radio stations & 4 RV channels
OF: But there's a lot about this matter in you affidavit.
O-T: I remember different things at different times.

OF: You have no reason to doubt what was in Ahern's email? Your view when you wrote to the MD was that Lattouf had expressed views that would be problematic?

O-T: During her period of employment
OF You understood there would be no coverage of Israel-Gaza that week?

O-T: Yes
OF: Did you think AL's signing a petition was relevant?
O-T: No but others were concerned
OF: You recall a series of texts the MD sent you that evening of Dec 18?
O-T: Yes

OF, referring to the one saying MD thought "we have an Antoinette problem. Her socials are full of anti-semitic hatred" and doubting ABC could have someone like that on air. Did you think he was right?

O-T: I did know much about the issue. I was concerned that she was on live radio.

OF: You had no idea what she was posting?

O-T: I agreed with Anderson that we had a problem because she was live.

OF: You were sent a screenshot about Crikey reporting by Lattouf & Cameron Wilson. What's problematic about her contributing to a Crikey article?

O-T: My concern was that she was live.
OF: ABC journalists publish articles every day where they express their opinions. Should this disqualify them from working at the ABC.

O-T: I'm not a journalist. When an MD uses words like "ant-semitic hatred" I become concerned.

OF: Didn't you say you didn't know anything about Lattouf's views, but were aware on the evening of Dec 18 that she was critical of the State of Israel?

O-T: MD told me that and supplied a screenshot.

Judge asks O-T to leave court. Discussion about line of questioning. OF says O-T was a decision-maker. The allegation was that Lattouf was sacked because of her political views. He wants to educe evidence that O-T was ate of those views. Judge suggests he take question in two steps. O-T returns.
Read 11 tweets
Feb 5
Our DAY FOUR reporting on the Lattouf v. ABC case will be on this thread and starting at 10.45am AEDT, the proceedings can be viewed via this link ⬇️
Image
@antoinette_news #LattoufvABC Day 4 hearing will begin in 15 minutes.
Lattouf lawyer Oshie Fagir (OF) continues questioning ABC managing director Mr Anderson (A).

Establishes that being fired by Australia's national broadcaster is a serious matter. Reminds A that he said all staff were well aware of ABC policies and guidelines.

OF: I asked if there were other rules not communicated to staff & only in the minds of management.

A: No, I cited sections of the EdPols regarding objectivity, which are in part informed by guidelines.

OF: What is objective journalism? Does that require qualification?

A: Reads extract and claims this to be clear.

OF Your view is that if a person's conduct in their private communications is perceived not to be impartial then that undermines the ABC's integrity?

A: That is the starting point for an investigation.

OF: You recall we spoke about a number of other ABC presenters who had made statements that were clearly not impartial, yet they were not sanctioned.

A: Because they were based on fact.

OF: So it didn't matter that millions of Australian would disagree with the statement "Australia is a racist country and always has been", by Laura Tingle?

A: No

OF: The critical point is whether the statement is true?

A: Yes

OF: Would you agree that the process you describe is arbitrary?

A: No, an investigation ensues & someone senior decides whether there should be a sanction or removal.

OF: Who decides whether a statement is true?

A: A delegate decides whether the statement is accurate.

Judge: Is this a typical process or the process.

A: Sometimes no decision needs to be made since there is no case to answer.

OF: You understand Ms Lattouf was fired because she posted something on social media. Was this process followed?

A: No

OF: You are the ABC's MD & have a deep understanding of its processes for dealing with misconduct. I want to understand your views on these processes.

ABC lawyer objects on relevance. A asked to leave the court.

OF: I want to understand why A took no steps to ensure an investigation took place, as required in the process he describes.

Judge: Are you suggesting A's understanding of the enterprise agreement is relevant?

OF: Yes, and according to ABC processes, I want to determine why he did not assure compliance.

Judge: I deem the line of questioning relevant.

ABC: Word of caution about the actual nature of the pleading.

OF to A: Should a process have been followed that wasn't.

A: I think an assessment was warranted. My understanding is that allegations were not put to Ms Lattouf.

OF: Nor was a support person or outside assessor appointed?

A: No, Ms Lattouf was not approached.

OF: In the case of Laura Tingle she was counseled but not in relation to her comments about racism in Australia?

A: Correct

OF: Complaints have been made about ABC presenter Paul Barry?

A: Yes

OF: He was never taken off air?

A: No

OF: And companies were received about John Lyons & Patricia Karvalas?

A: Yes

OF: Sanctioned or taken off air?

A: No

OF: So expressing political opinion does not necessarily cause sanction or dismissal?

A: No

OF: I'm suggesting ABC processes invite arbitrary decision-making, ultimately resting upon a delegate's own view?

A: There is a process of assessment

OF: And the presenter would normally be aware of what they had done?

A: Yes

Judge asks A to leave the room. Addresses OF. I thought you would ask A why he had not assured due process. Can you do this more directly?

OF: You know Lattouf was not a political reporter for the ABC?

A: Yes

OF: And so her personal social media post could not have had an impact on her partiality in air?

A: It could have.

OF: The ABC was subject to a coordinated campaign about Ms Lattouf?

A Yes, there were about 50 emails that were worded almost the same.

OF: Bearing in mind that it is not uncommon for the ABC to "ruffle feathers", are such communications looked into?

A: Yes

OF: How did you learn about the WhatsApp campaign?

A: I was told by a subordinate that the campaign was coordinated via WhatsApp. The emails were clogging up my email account. They were all the same so I stopped reading them.

OF: They said Ms Lattouf was anti-semitic.

A: Yes.

OF: You knew the campaign was coordinated by Lawyers for Israel?

A: I learned that later.

OF: You came to agree with the complaints that Ms Lattouf's criticism of Israel were ant-semitic?

A: I looked at her social media posts. I can't remember exactly what constituted anti-semitic hatred; whether it was her statements or surrounding statements.

OF: You mean other people's statements?

A: Yes. I became concerned about what Lattouf might say on air.
Read 11 tweets
Feb 4
Our DAY THREE reporting on the Lattouf v. ABC case will be on this thread and starting at 10.15am AEDT, the proceedings can be viewed via this link ⬇️
Image
Court will call on two documents from Feb 6 2025 & Jan 31 2025. The Applicant t has been given them.

ABC: The Applicant's intro jumbled the chronology of events. We will correct that. The decision that Lattouf would not continue to present was made solely by Mr Oliver-Taylor.

The only question for the court is the immediate reason for his decision.

A thread the Applicant wishes to construct is that Ms Buttrose, Anderson & Oliver-Taylor were hostile to Lattouf. There was only a perception of partiality in her social media posting.

A second thread is that complaints the ABC influenced actions taken. This is not so.

Now I'd like to turn to the contract between ABC & Lattouf.
ABC: Lattouf's contract mentions dates, hourly rate of pay, enterprise agreement, basis of agreement. It's a casual employment contract, which includes "should you be offered...", plus a variation term, which gives the ABC the right to alter dates before AND during the period of employment.

The contract also deals with the subject of termination. There is an agreement clause, which specifies ABC policies.

Lattouf began her employment on Monday Dec 18 2023. Less than 2 hours after her first program ended...

Judge wants to see intermediary correspondence.

Less than 2 hours after her first program ended, ABC began to receive complaints about Lattouf. Some came to Mr Anderson who forwarded them to Mr Oliver-Taylor & Mr Melkman, asking them to look into the matter.
Read 20 tweets
Feb 3
Our DAY TWO reporting on the Lattouf v. ABC case will be on this thread and starting at 10.15am AEDT, the proceedings can be viewed via this link ⬇️
youtube.com/watch?v=ewJZTJ…

Read our DAY ONE account below.
x.com/Consortiumnews… x.com/Consortiumnews…Image
@antoinette_news Some background information on Lattouf's case.
Recent longitudinal study of media bias on Israel-Palestine reporting at ABC Australia, providing context to the unlawful dismissal case of @antoinette_news.

johnmenadue.com/palestinian-vo…

"The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is widely regarded as one of the most trusted brands in Australian media. This trust is underpinned by the ABC’s editorial policies. Among these policies, the principles of independence, impartiality, and diversity of perspectives are foundational.

For example, two principles are “Do not unduly favour one perspective over another” and “Ensure that editorial decisions are not improperly influenced by political [interests].”"Image
Read 31 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(