Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich has sued the former NSW One Nation leader for defamation in the Federal Court over a tweet sent in March 2023, days after the state election.
Mr Latham's explicit tweet describing sex acts between men was in response to an earlier post quoting the independent state MP describing him as a "disgusting human being".
Mr Greenwich said the tweet caused him anxiety, panic attacks and fear of large public gatherings. (Dan Himbrechts/AAP PHOTOS)
Mr Greenwich, who is gay, claims Mr Latham's post defamed him by claiming he engaged in disgusting sexual acts and was not fit to be a politician.
But on Thursday, Latham's barrister Kieran Smark SC rejected that argument about the "striking" tweet.
"It is offensive and crass and vulgar, but we'll have to grapple with it all," he told Justice David O'Callaghan.
"Mr Latham's tweet may have wounded Mr Greenwich, but it didn't wound his reputation."
The overwhelming response by the public, media and politicians was condemnation of the One Nation leader's post, Mr Smark said.
"Quite clearly many people thought that (Mr Latham) had demeaned himself by making the tweet but he hadn't landed a reputational blow on Mr Greenwich even if he caused him significant offence."
Just because something was vulgar did not make it defamatory, Mr Smark added.
An ordinary reasonable person would not think less of Mr Greenwich because of the tweet, he said.
Mr Smark (left) said homophobes who responded to Mr Latham's post had not changed their mind. (Dan Himbrechts/AAP PHOTOS)
Mr Smark added that homophobes - some of them clearly unhinged - who had responded to Mr Latham's post had not changed their mind because of what had been written.
"All that's coming to that person is an echo of their pre-existing belief," he said.
The independent MP has also sued over statements by Mr Latham published in the Daily Telegraph in April 2023, which he says defamed him further by accusing him of grooming children in schools.
Mr Smark denied these imputations were carried and argued that these statements also did not harm Mr Greenwich's reputation.
In weighing up whether a publication was defamatory, a court had to consider both freedom of speech and a person's ability to protect their reputation from harm, Mr Smark said.
Mr Latham also brought a number of defences if the court found the tweet and his statements to the Daily Telegraph were defamatory.
One of these was a right to respond to the provocation from Mr Greenwich.
Mr Greenwich's barrister Matt Collins (right) said the tweet had unleashed abuse and death threats. (Dan Himbrechts/AAP PHOTOS)
"You're entitled in a reply to attack to respond to the allegations or respond to the character of your attacker if you choose to do so," Mr Smark said.
Mr Greenwich previously told the court that the tweet had caused him anxiety, panic attacks and fear of being in large public gatherings.
He said his mental state made him question whether he could continue advocating for his voters as well as the wider LGBTQI community.
Mr Greenwich's barrister Matt Collins KC said the tweet had unleashed a torrent of abuse, including death threats, on the Sydney MP and those working at his electorate office.
The online sparring match 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 who had set themselves up outside the Belfield church, the court was told.
The hearing continues.
Lifeline 13 11 14
Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578
