A wealthy Queensland family were portrayed as "selfish", "suspicious" and "disgraceful" by a Nine Network program suggesting they caused the 2011 floods that killed 12 people, a court has heard.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Toowoomba's Wagner brothers are suing the network and journalist Nick Cater for defamation over a 60 Minutes report aired in May 2015 on the wall of water, described as an "inland tsunami", that fatally swept through Grantham.
Denis, John, Neill and Joe Wagner say the report by journalist Michael Usher incorrectly insinuated the collapse of a wall of a Lockyer Valley quarry they owned caused the "man-made catastrophe", in which a two-year-old girl died.
A four-person jury has watched the 15-minute report, titled "The Missing Hour", after the Brisbane Supreme Court trial began on Tuesday.
The report does not expressly blame them for the deaths but the family believes it led people to believe they caused the disaster, sought to cover it up and refused to answer to the public.
The Wagners' barrister, Tom Blackburn SC, took issue with repeated statements by Mr Usher and Mr Cater, quoted as an expert, claiming it was an act of God turned deadly by the failings of men.
"The viewer knows this is the Wagner's quarry," Mr Blackburn told the jury.
"They owned it at the time. They operated it. They were the ones who should have avoided it and didn't."
Mr Blackburn said the Wagners' description as one of Australia's wealthiest families who refused to take part in an interview prejudiced them as "selfish blokes from the big end of town" who were trying to hide.
"You might think, members of the jury, the viewer watching this program would think that's just disgraceful," Mr Blackburn said.
He said Mr Usher took an "insinuating tone" and Mr Cater "expressed himself forcefully", while "eerie" music in the background created an "atmosphere of suspicion".
The respondents' barrister Rob Anderson QC denied the allegedly defamatory insinuations were conveyed, saying the case against them relied on cherry-picking the report.
"The plaintiffs have viewed this program through their own eyes," he said.
"Perhaps they're being precious or paranoid.
"The reality is the program is about ... the locals' accounts of the flood event (that) weren't being heard."
The trial continues.
Australian Associated Press
