Even for less than honourable professions, this was way out of bounds
The Herald Sun investigation did not substantiate the allegation, which on Wednesday was denied by Groth. Instead, it has created a likely test case for Australia's strengthened privacy laws, which include a new statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy.
The paper's interest in the Groths' sexual history was piqued by the Groths' comments in previous interviews when they said the first met in 2011 at the Templestowe Park Tennis Club. This would make Brittany 16 or 17 years old and Sam Groth either 23 or 24.
Drill reported that unnamed Liberal Party colleagues raised the issue with Groth amid concerns it could be weaponised by his political opponents. This suggests Groth's enemies within the Liberal Party fuelled this grubby exposé.
Groth says the matter was never raised with him by a colleague. He also says neither he nor Brittany – the only two people who know the circumstances of when their sexual relationship started – spoke to the Herald Sun about the story before publication.
The Groths' lawyers, defamation expert Patrick George and barrister Sue Chrysanthou, SC, are the team which successfully sued former Liberal leader John Pesutto on behalf of colleague Moira Deeming. On Wednesday morning, their legal letter landed in the inbox of Herald Sun editor-in-chief Sam Weir.
Loading
If this case progresses to trial, it will be nervously watched by rival media organisations including Nine, the publisher of this masthead, which lobbied for years against the introduction of a statutory privacy tort.
The concerns notice seen by this masthead makes clear that while the defamatory imputations are against Sam Groth – the most serious being that 'he sexually assaulted Brittany when she was under 18' and 'committed a crime of sexual assault against a minor in his care or supervision' – the most egregious invasion of privacy was against Brittany Groth.
Any woman, even one married to a politician, should be safe in thinking their teenage sexual history is off-limits to political skulduggery and newspaper snooping. The concerns notice describes the decision to 'name and shame' Brittany Groth as an alleged victim of child sexual assault as a 'grotesque act'.
'There was no basis to allege that any relevant sexual misconduct took place merely because our clients are said to have met when Mrs Groth was 17,' the notice read. 'Mr Groth has not been charged with any crime, or even investigated or questioned by police.'
The privacy laws recognise media freedom as a countervailing public interest. The Herald Sun, which is standing by its reporting, will seek to test the strength of this provision. The outcome of any trial could have far-reaching implications for journalism and the politicians we report on.
But at its heart, this story turns on questions that, frankly, feel wrong to ask. Are any of us entitled to know when and in what circumstances a politician and their partner consummated a loving, ongoing relationship?
To return to Ferguson's observation about journalists, we're not awful people, really.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
High Court battle looms for state Labor's work-from-home push
A High Court showdown is looming over a Victorian plan to legislate a right to work from home, as legal experts warn the Allan government's move would unconstitutionally encroach on federal industrial relations powers. Premier Jacinta Allan has maintained that the government could enshrine a right for public and private sector employees to work from home two days a week via state anti-discrimination laws, but lawyers warn the move directly challenges federal workplace law. 'The advice we have is that when it comes to the federal workplace arrangements, there is the Fair Work Act and there is explicit provision in the Fair Work Act for state-based anti-discrimination laws to continue to apply,' Allan told ABC radio on Monday. 'The Fair Work Act provides us with the floor, and what we're choosing to do here in Victoria is build on that floor to protect working from home as a right.' Allan's comments put her at odds with lawyers and other legal experts who have cast deep doubt on the government's ability to legislate the right to work from home as most workplace laws are under the jurisdiction of the federal government. In Victoria, the state has even fewer powers because of a 1996 Kennett government deal that handed powers to regulate employment conditions to the Commonwealth. Loading This means that unlike other states, Victoria does not even have the ability to create workplace laws for its own public sector employees. Stephen Smith, principal at ACTUS Workplace Lawyers, said Victorian legislation to enact a broad right to work from home would be a major constitutional issue.
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
High Court battle looms for state Labor's work-from-home push
A High Court showdown is looming over a Victorian plan to legislate a right to work from home, as legal experts warn the Allan government's move would unconstitutionally encroach on federal industrial relations powers. Premier Jacinta Allan has maintained that the government could enshrine a right for public and private sector employees to work from home two days a week via state anti-discrimination laws, but lawyers warn the move directly challenges federal workplace law. 'The advice we have is that when it comes to the federal workplace arrangements, there is the Fair Work Act and there is explicit provision in the Fair Work Act for state-based anti-discrimination laws to continue to apply,' Allan told ABC radio on Monday. 'The Fair Work Act provides us with the floor, and what we're choosing to do here in Victoria is build on that floor to protect working from home as a right.' Allan's comments put her at odds with lawyers and other legal experts who have cast deep doubt on the government's ability to legislate the right to work from home as most workplace laws are under the jurisdiction of the federal government. In Victoria, the state has even fewer powers because of a 1996 Kennett government deal that handed powers to regulate employment conditions to the Commonwealth. Loading This means that unlike other states, Victoria does not even have the ability to create workplace laws for its own public sector employees. Stephen Smith, principal at ACTUS Workplace Lawyers, said Victorian legislation to enact a broad right to work from home would be a major constitutional issue.
7NEWS
3 hours ago
- 7NEWS
Chinese woman charged with reckless foreign interference over Canberra Buddhist association spying
A Chinese woman has been charged after police alleged she was sent to gather information from an Australian association. The woman, who is also an Australian permanent resident, was arrested on Saturday after the Australian Federal Police (AFP) executed search warrants at homes in Canberra. The investigation began in March after a tip-off from Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). During the searches, several items — including electronic devices — were seized. Police allege the woman was tasked by China's Public Security Bureau to covertly gather information about the Canberra branch of Guan Yin Citta, a Buddhist association. She has been charged with reckless foreign interference and faced the ACT Magistrates Court on Monday. The offence carries a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment. This is the first time the AFP has charged someone with foreign interference involving a community group, rather than the political or academic sectors. Assistant Commissioner Stephen Nutt said the woman's conduct was covert, deceptive, and undisclosed to those being monitored. 'There was covert and deceptive conduct about collecting information on the Buddhist group, acting in concert or collaboration with a person from China's Public Security Bureau,' he told reporters on Monday. While it remains unclear how the information was intended to be used, Nutt described the case as a threat to democracy, social cohesion, and national sovereignty. 'Foreign interference is a serious crime that undermines democracy and social cohesion,' he said. 'Foreign interference activity may be used to influence a political or government process, influence the exercise of an Australian democratic or political right, support the intelligence objectives of a foreign principle, or prejudice national security. ' Nutt said the investigation is ongoing and further charges have not been ruled out, with police planning more arrests. This is the third time a foreign interference offence has been laid in Australia since the Commonwealth introduced new laws in 2018. A Victorian man was charged in November 2020, while a NSW man was charged in April 2023. 'As with other like-minded countries, Australia is not immune to foreign interference, and we should not expect that this arrest will prevent further attempts to target our diaspora communities,' Nutt said. 'At a time of permanent regional contest, offenders will attempt to spy on individuals, groups and institutions in Australia. 'That's why the AFP and our partners will continue to educate the community about what foreign interference is, how communities can protect themselves, and importantly, encourage the public to contact authorities if they believe they are being targeted by those working for foreign entities. ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess warned those targeting diaspora communities not to underestimate Australia's national security agencies. 'Anyone who thinks it is acceptable to monitor, intimidate and potentially repatriate members of our diaspora communities should never underestimate our capabilities and resolve,' he said. A factsheet on foreign interference is available in more than 40 languages on the AFP website. It explains what foreign interference is, how it manifests, and what individuals can do if they believe they are being threatened or intimidated by foreign governments. Members of the public who feel threatened should contact their local police on 131 444, or in an emergency or life-threatening situation, call triple-0 immediately. Individuals or community groups who feel they are the target of foreign interference are encouraged to contact the National Security Hotline on 1800 123 400.
