Mark Latham argues defamation shouldn’t stand because tweet brought ‘sympathy’ not harm

Mark Latham argues the victim of a vulgar, sexually explicit tweet was not defamed because people instead offered sympathy and support, in submissions slammed as incoherent and irresponsible.

The firebrand independent MP is challenging an order to pay fellow crossbencher Alex Greenwich $140,000 over the post sent days after the NSW state election in 2023.

The tweet described the gay politician engaging in explicit sex acts and came as a response to Mr Greenwich describing Mr Latham a “disgusting human being”.

The court found the post defamed the LGBTQI advocate by suggesting he engaged in disgusting sexual activities.

The former federal Labor leader and NSW One Nation leader has appealed, claiming that calling someone gay or saying gay men had sex was not defamatory.

Mr Latham has argued the tweet merely referred to a “commonly practised” sexual activity that Mr Greenwich would have engaged in with his husband and that any award of damages be tossed.

Mr Latham also claims he was merely responding to an attack.

However, this has been rejected by Mr Greenwich.

The post was not warranted because it went after sexual activities which were presumed private, the Sydney MP wrote in documents filed with the Federal Court.

“It was a public vilification that is incapable of being defended by reference to reason,” Mr Greenwich said.

He slammed Mr Latham’s appeal as incoherent because it claimed the tweet related to political matters while simultaneously arguing any reader would not view Mr Greenwich as unfit to sit in parliament.

The appeal court was also urged to reject the political firebrand’s “irresponsible” submission that Mr Greenwich took advantage of the post to improve his position politically.

In his own appeal submissions, Mr Latham said his rival had experienced no damage to his reputation because people instead offered sympathy and support.

The independent MP’s evidence also showed his feelings were hurt - not from the explicit tweet - but due to the homophobic reactions from those who read it, he argues.

“Given that Greenwich is an openly homosexual politician, it was open to conclude that many who communicated had ‘well-entrenched perceptions’ as to his character, reputation, homosexuality and politics.”

The arguments will be ventilated in a three-day hearing beginning on November 25, which includes Mr Greenwich’s arguments for a higher award of damages.

The MPs also await judgment in a homosexual vilification case the left-wing independent filed against Mr Latham over the tweet.

The online sparring between the two politicians followed violent protests outside a church in Sydney’s southwest, where Mr Latham was giving a pre-election speech in March 2023.

About 250 mostly male counter-protesters violently attacked police and 15 LGBTQI protesters.

Lifeline 13 11 14

Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578