Read the grovelling apology from the top lawyer blamed for Lisa Wilkinson's disastrous Logies speech - as she breaks silence after being SAVAGED by Bruce Lehrmann trial judge

Network Ten's top litigator has finally admitted she was wrong to approve Lisa Wilkinson's disastrous Logies speech.

Tasha Smithies' grovelling apology was laid bare in an affidavit tendered to the Federal Court on Wednesday during a costs hearing for Bruce Lehrmann's defamation trial against Network Ten and Wilkinson.

Ms Smithies had told the court in February that she did not think there were any issues with Wilkinson's Logies acceptance speech before it was delivered at the award ceremony in June 2022.

The speech was broadcast on television, eight days before Lehrmann's rape trial, and was treated as a potential contempt issue because Wilkinson referred to Brittany Higgins as a proven rape victim rather than as an alleged rape victim.

As a direct result of that speech, the criminal trial was moved from June to October 2022 because the ACT Chief Justice was concerned jurors may have been exposed to the intense publicity and form bias against Lehrmann.

During a cross-claim in Lehrmann's defamation hearing in February, Ms Smithies refused to accept that her legal advice regarding the speech was poor.

However, her affidavit reflected a significant change of heart since Justice Michael Lee handed down his decision in the matter on April 15 - which included findings about the Wilkinson's speech and Ms Smithies' legal advice.

She said: 'The trial judgement has had a profound and sobering impact on me. The 11 days since April 15, 2024, have been the most difficult of my career.

'The day after the delivery of the trial judgement, I took a week off work to go away with my family.

'I have read the trial judgement very carefully, especially those parts which relate to me and the advice I gave Ms Wilkinson in relation to the speech she delivered at the TV Week Logie Awards on June 19, 2022.'

She said the judgement at paragraph 1054 in particular 'hit home'.

In paragraph 1054 of the judgement, Justice Lee said: 'There has been ample time for mature reflection and yet there is no recognition, even now, that the speech could have undermined the administration of justice and caused it to be disrupted.

'It is one thing to make a mistake, even a serious mistake – after all, to err is to be human.

'But I regret to say that the continuing lack of insight by Ms Smithies as to the inappropriateness of her conduct related to the speech reflects, in my view, a lack of proper appreciation of her professional obligations as a solicitor and her paramount duty to the Court and the administration of justice.'

Ms Smithies said she had 'reflected deeply' on her legal advice to Wilkinson, the prejudice the speech caused, and the impact it had on Lehrmann's trial. 

She has now sought counsel from Network Ten's barrister Matthew Collins KC about the advice she gave Wilkinson, along with her evidence, and the conclusions Justice Lee made about her conduct.

She continued: 'I honestly believed at the time that Ms Wilkinson's delivery of [the speech] would not amount to contempt of court.

'I have come to see that the evidence I gave on February 13 and 14, 2024, was misplaced.'

Ms Smithies was cross-examined by Wilkinson's barrister Michael Elliott SC in February in Wilkinson's civil case against Network Ten, which was a cross-claim in Lehrmann's defamation trial.

She sued the network for more than $700,000 worth of legal fees accrued when she hired defamation barrister Sue Chrysanthou to defend her, rather than using Ten's lawyers.

Wilkinson had claimed the network did not have her best interests at heart, which her lawyers sought to prove when Ms Smithies was cross-examined.

Network Ten had initially refused to reveal whether it provided Wilkinson with legal advice over the Logies speech, before it confirmed she did get legal advice but would not reveal the substance of that advice.

The advice was only revealed during the cross-claim in February.

Mr Elliott accused Ms Smithies of trying to hide the advice because it would be a matter of public embarrassment to her if it ever came out that she gave the speech the tick of approval.

'I am not personally or professionally embarrassed by the advice I have Ms Wilkinson,' Ms Smithies had said. 

Mr Elliott also said Network Ten could have released a media statement to clear Wilkinson's name during the Logies speech fallout, protecting her from intense public criticism.

'You knew full well there was nothing stopping Channel Ten from making a statement saying Ms Wilkinson had been given advice about the Logies speech,' he suggested.

Ms Smithies said: 'I don't accept that.'

Mr Elliott continued: 'Then you are utterly ill-equipped to have any role in Ms Wilkinson's defence.'

She replied: 'I don't accept that.'

Wilkinson's cross-claim was successful and the network was required to cover her legal costs.

In his findings on April 15, Justice Lee found on a balance of probabilities that Lehrmann had raped Ms Higgins in Parliament House in March 2019.

The costs hearing on Wednesday was to determine what Lehrmann, as the loser of the trial, will have to pay his opponents.