THREAD. Was Dyson Heydon denied "procedural fairness"? In short, no. As explored & explained by someone far more learned in the law than me, allow me to share his insights. But be advised three women are now suing Heydon & the Commonwealth. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-23/dyson-heydon-sexual-harassment-complainants-seek-compensation/12383978">https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020...

Newscorpse& #39;s long-suffering (we& #39;ve suffered long enough) "legal affairs" scribbler Chris Merritt suggested the former High Court HeydonJ was denied procedural fairness because he was not given the opportunity to cross examine the accusers, only respond to written allegations.

Merritt is certainly not a scholar. He& #39;s a journo, & at that, a journo who is woefully ignorant. The rules of procedural fairness as established in countless legal decisions do not require a right of cross examination -- only the right to answer allegations.

Heydon was afforded that opportunity to answer allegations. At no point has Heydon anywhere denied what occurred. Instead he has hidden behind the disingenuous "if/any" non-apology. Apparently his actions were all unintentional & inadvertent.

Does Newscorpse really believe Dyson Heydon should have had the right to cross-examine the very women whom the Chief Justice has accepted were sexually harrassed?