Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Craig McLachlan under siege: not guilty but still under attack by the feminist mob

By Bettina Arndt - posted Tuesday, 14 April 2026


Craig embarked on defamation action against the leading complainant and key media companies over their reporting in the case but ultimately pulled out after learning it was not permissible to refer to the not-guilty verdict in the defamation trial.

The ongoing debacle led Vanessa to make the podcast series, dissecting the evidence, showing that the behaviour of the complainants falls far short of Wallington’s praise and exposing her consent comment as thoroughly misleading.

Take a look at some examples of the real behaviour of these “brave and honest women,” many of which took place in front of sell-out audiences, all rivetted on Craig’s every move:

Advertisement
  • The legendary thigh-tickling caper. One accusation involved Craig reaching up to tickle the complainant up to her inner thigh (while she was perched on an elevated platform). Problem was the physical setup made it comically implausible (he could barely get past her ankle). A further allegation that Craig touched this complainant’s vagina during the show was emphatically denied by the woman herself.

  • The mid-song passionate smooch. It was alleged that Craig suddenly paused during his big number to passionately tongue-kiss one of the women onstage — even though the scene was choreographed to the split-second with music and lighting cues, giving him roughly zero room to improvise any erotic detours.

  • Hug with extras. A late addition to the endlessly revised list of allegations involved a complainant asking Craig for a hug when an alleged surprise stiffy made an appearance. There was zero evidence supporting this nor the suggestion that Craig waltzed around the stage with no underwear under his flimsy boxer shorts.

  • The face-grab fiasco. Witnesses swore blind that Craig grabbed one accuser by the jaw mid-scene and angrily hurled her face aside like a discarded prop. The actual complainant? She shrugged and said the scripted gentle face-touch was just “a little firmer than usual.”

  • Much ado about absolutely bugger all. The bulk of the allegations were flatly denied by Craig, riddled with contradictions, or quietly undermined by complainants whose stories kept evolving. Throw in the fact that these women were full-throated participants in the hyper-sexualised, fishnet-and-corset madhouse that is Rocky Horror and the claim that they hadn’t given implied consent starts to look patently absurd.

As for Wallington’s comment about new sexual consent laws. There has been a change in Victorian law requiring that the accused person not only has to genuinely believe he had consent but that a reasonable person in the same circumstance would reach the same conclusion.

In only two of the 13 charges was consent law even mentioned as being applicable. One example where consent was an issue involved Craig sitting on a complainant’s lap. Evidence showed lap-sitting was commonplace in the bawdy backstage culture of the Rocky production. In fact, the same complainant had also straddled Craig’s thigh, joking about leaving “snail trails.”

Here the charges were dismissed because the magistrate accepted that Craig genuinely believed she consented. And, given the circumstances, it is a fair bet that any reasonable person in his position would have believed the same. So, even under Victoria’s new consent laws, the result would have been no different.

Wallington’s unwarranted editorial comments were entirely unnecessary to the decision. They were unnecessary comments that she ought to have known would be weaponised to undermine the very verdict she had delivered. In one breath she cleared him; she awarded him costs; and in the next she handed his critics the perfect excuse to misleadingly claim that his acquittal was the result of a mere technicality. The damage has been profound and lasting.

Yet the truth is finally breaking through. Vanessa Scammell’s compelling podcast Not Guilty is reaching people the world over who have watched #MeToo cases explode with devastating publicity but no proper media scrutiny when they disintegrate in court.

Advertisement

Craig McLachlan is determined to move forward. With exciting projects ahead, he is ready to reclaim the stage that was stolen from him. Spread the word. Help bring one of Australia’s finest entertainers back to where he belongs.

 

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All

This article was first published on Bettina Arndt.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

1 post so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Bettina Arndt is a social commentator.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Bettina Arndt

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 1 comment
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy