Closing arguments begin in Deeming v Pesutto

The summing up and closing arguments in Deeming V Pesutto have begun in the Federal Court. Barrister Sue Chrysanthou, representing Moira Deeming MP, has come out swinging against the Liberal opposition leader John Pesutto. She told the court that his behaviour has been all about his own “political expediency” and not in the public interest as he has tried to claim.

Barrister Sue Chrysanthou, representing Ms Deeming, sought to dismantle his defences of contextual truth, honest opinion and public interest during the first day of closing arguments.

Ms Chrysanthou told the court that the premise of publications made by Mr Pesutto after the protest, which included interviews, a media release and a press conference, served to be “derogatory about my client” and that he “went into bat” against Ms Deeming in a 3AW interview.

She also accused him of providing “dishonest evidence” about why the 15-page dossier compiled to justify his decision to move a motion to expel Ms Deeming was circulated to journalists, and aimed to shoot down a claim that the document was released in the public interest.

“He truly believed it was a matter of … his own political expediency,” she said. “His credibility as a politician, his personal interest as a politician is not in the public interest.”

Another argument Pesutto’s lawyer attempted to produce was that Deeming had a ‘bad reputation.’

Federal judge David O’Callaghan was told there was no evidence of Ms Deeming having a relevant bad reputation, and it was for Mr Pesutto’s lawyers to prove so. “I’m sure there are people who disagree with Mother Teresa … Would anyone say she has a bad reputation? That’s a different issue,” Ms Chrysanthou said.

Justice O’Callaghan asked what relevance the secret tape had that was produced a week before the proceedings began. The tape clearly demonstrated the bullying tone and tactics the Liberal leadership team employed against Deeming.

Ms Chrysanthou said the audio recording would paint a picture of Mr Pesutto’s state of mind.

“He’s conducted a false narrative,” she told the court.

“We are not arguing an unfair ­dismissal case.”

She said Mr Pesutto should have asked his deputy, David Southwick, for the tape and he ought to have disclosed its existence in his affidavit.

“No honest witness would behave the way he behaved,” she said.

The closing arguments will run through to Thursday with a decision expected in December.