Attorney-General Christian Porter’s press conference in Perth this afternoon.Credit:Paul Kane
“That’s completely wrong. There is no context in which he is going to be required to disprove anything,that would not be the purpose of an inquiry and it wouldn’t be part of the process of an inquiry - he knows that that’s not the case,” Mr Bradley said.
Loading
“There’s nothing particularly unusual about such a process to inquire into and make a determination on a serious allegation against a person in a position of responsibility - that literally happens every day of the week.
“The question to the Prime Minister is,is it okay to proceed with business as usual,and take the case as closed purely on the basis that Mr Porter says it didn’t happen? Or,do we need to properly test and address the allegation to put it to bed fully one way or the other,so that we can all move on.“
Mr Bradley said the purpose of an inquiry would be to weigh up evidence from the deceased woman against Mr Porter’s version of events - which was not an impossible thing to do.
“If you have… the testimony of someone who can’t be cross-examined for whatever reason[such as being deceased] then that factors into the weight that you would give that evidence that would be a matter for the tribunal,” he said.
“But it doesn’t present an impossibility,and it doesn’t[mean],‘well this process should not be even attempted because it’s all too hard’. That’s not an answer.”