When Brittany Higgins’ tearful tell-all interview over her alleged rape at Parliament House aired on The Project on February 15, 2021, more than half-a-million people nationwide watched her indicate she believed her alleged rape was the subject of a political cover-up.
Among them was then-defence minister Linda Reynolds — who didn’t know it at the time, but was witnessing the beginning of her own political demise from the Canberra ministerial office in which the alleged crime had taken place two years earlier.
Reynolds’ lawyer accused Higgins of casting the senator as the villain in a “fairytale” plot to bring down a government. But what does the evidence say?Credit: Composite image: Marija Ercegovac.
It was something the WA Liberal senator had warned then-prime minister Scott Morrison’s office and her closest friends was imminent.
But Reynolds was still ill-prepared for the gulf between her recollection of what unfolded in the weeks after the former staffer’s alleged rape and Higgins’.
It wasn’t until the release of a pre-interview briefing between The Project’s co-host Lisa Wilkinson, Higgins and her now-husband David Sharaz as part of accused rapist Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation trial that Reynolds realised, she claims, she was the victim of a “premeditated and personal attack” that led to her public breakdown and professional downfall.
Lehrmann has maintained his innocence since his 2022 criminal trial was aborted due to juror misconduct, and is appealing against a civil ruling that found, on the balance of probabilities, that he raped Higgins.
Reynolds subsequently sued Higgins for defamation in a five-week trial, with hearings recently concluded, demanding damages over several social media posts which she characterised as “carefully curated press releases” accusing her of mishandling the rape, and engaging in a campaign of harassment.
The former minister accused Higgins and Sharaz of planning an “unprovoked attack underpinned by visceral hatred”, handpicking journalists, curating story timing and aiding her political opponents.
Higgins vigorously defended the claim on the basis her posts were substantially true.
She also rubbished the premeditated conspiracy claims of Reynolds’ lawsuit, insisting Reynolds’ reputation was of her own making and already baked in when she published the posts.
On the first day of a trial over which both women mortgaged their homes, Reynolds’ lawyer, Martin Bennett, accused Higgins and Sharaz as co-conspirators who had cast the senator as the villain in their “fairytale” plot to bring down the Morrison government.
But what does the evidence say about the “tale” that divides them?
The handling of the rape allegation
Shortly before 1.40am on Saturday, March 23, 2019, Lehrmann and Higgins entered Parliament House after a night out. The security guard noted they appeared intoxicated, but they were still led to Reynolds’ suite.
Lehrmann left alone around 2.30am. Higgins, then 24 years old, was discovered by a guard, naked, at 4.15am before departing around 10am.
CCTV footage from Parliament House showing a barefoot and intoxicated Brittany Higgins staring at the ceiling.Credit: Federal Court of Australia
It wasn’t until just before midday the following Tuesday that the Department of Finance told Reynolds’ then-chief of staff, Fiona Brown, that Higgins and Lehrmann had been in the office intoxicated, and that Higgins had been found undressed and had declined an ambulance or medical assistance.
Brown informed the senator before meeting with Higgins and Lehrmann separately to “get their version”.
Lehrmann packed his desk and left for the day; Higgins was handed an employee assistance brochure.
By Wednesday, the prime minister’s office was briefed and Reynolds had a sealed incident report.
Brown claims she met Higgins again to tell her she was always available to talk and Higgins could make a complaint.
It wasn’t until Thursday Higgins told Brown she had accessed the counselling, before revealing she remembered Lehrmann on top of her, a comment the chief of staff did not take as an allegation of sexual assault.
Tensions over how to handle what had hitherto been treated as a security breach reached fever pitch by Friday, March 29, according to former staffer Dean Carlson, who told the WA court Reynolds and Brown had a heated call over whether to go to police.
Carlson told the court Reynolds was adamant they should, but Brown resisted doing so without Higgins’ permission.
Later that day, Brown claims, she called Higgins and scheduled a meeting with the then-minister, assuring her that Reynolds was supportive and wanted the staffer to know the options available.
She claimed Higgins had told her she did not want to file a report and would talk to her father, who was visiting Canberra from Queensland.
Brown checked in with Higgins again in the hours before their next meeting.
On April 1, 2019, Reynolds and Brown’s private meeting with Higgins would become a focal point of the former staffer’s claim the rape was dealt with insensitively.
Reynolds claims she spent that meeting reassuring Higgins, insisting they would support her in filing a complaint or seeking help, and her job would be safe.
Higgins would later tell the press it was “a blur” she could “barely recall”, distracted by being just metres from the couch on which the alleged rape occurred.
Afterwards, Brown took Higgins to internal Australian Federal Police officers before elevating a request that would let Higgins work from her Queensland hometown.
Reynolds told Brown she believed Lehrmann’s employment should be terminated based on two security breaches, saying he was untrustworthy.
Just 72 hours later, Brown and Reynolds were back in the ministerial office — this time, with Assistant AFP Commissioner Leanne Close, who later told the WA court it wasn’t until she arrived that she became aware that was where the alleged incident had occurred.
Reynolds rejects Close’s recollection, maintaining there was no allegation of assault at that stage, and if there was, she would not have held the meeting there.
Reynolds maintains she thought then that she was dealing with a young staffer who had too much to drink and was having trouble remembering what followed.
When Reynolds’ lawyer Bennett grilled her, Close conceded it was unlikely there would have been anything of real forensic value remaining by this time.
The following day, Lehrmann’s employment was terminated.
Higgins informed the AFP she no longer intended to proceed with a complaint just over a week later, on April 13, before boarding a flight to Perth where she would spend six weeks on the re-election campaign for Reynolds.
Higgins claimed her former boss kept her at arm’s length and that she spent the work stint ostracised and shut in a hotel room seven days a week.
But Reynolds’ lawyer claims the evidence suggested otherwise, with photographs, social media posts and correspondence tendered showing the “young, vivacious” staffer door-knocking, dining out, and rubbing shoulders with senior party figures, including Scott Morrison.
Higgins’ lawyers highlighted text messages showing that beneath the surface, she was processing what had happened — including several messages revealing frustration with the Liberal Party and fear that she could lose her job if she filed a police report.
Reynolds told the court she asked Higgins whether she should brief WA senator Michaelia Cash about the incident before Higgins began a new role with Cash’s office, but Higgins declined in favour of “a fresh start”.
Reynolds’ lawyer Bennett decried Higgins’ claims of mishandling and lack of support, claiming she was offered support on more than 20 occasions following the incident.
But Higgins’ barrister told the court Reynolds had failed to offer a “basic human response”, which she used to justify the social media posts at the centre of the row.
Justice Paul Tottle highlighted the complexity in examining Reynolds’ handling of the allegation given Higgins had made her desire for power and control over the situation known.
“One of the things that comes through quite clearly ... is Ms Higgins’ desire not to be defined by the events … As she puts it, she doesn’t want to be known as the woman who was raped in Parliament House,” he told the court.
The perfect storm or a ‘conspiracy’ to create ‘a f---ing scoop’?
The incident largely escaped the media’s attention until January 11, 2021, when Higgins’ then-boyfriend, press gallery journalist David Sharaz, texted News Corp print journalist Samantha Maiden indicating he had a “big story”, the court heard.
Less than a fortnight later, Sharaz pitched that story to high-profile TV journalist Lisa Wilkinson.
“MeToo, Liberal Party, Project Pitch”, the subject line read. It was a story Sharaz stressed needed to be “done right” because going after the so-called Liberal Party machine was “no easy feat”.
Meanwhile, Maiden was hosting Higgins at her home for an hour-long interview, with a recording played to the court.
Higgins told Maiden she believed Reynolds kept her at arm’s length for fear the incident might cost her the portfolio she had “worked her entire life for”.
On January 27, 2021, Higgins and Sharaz flew to Sydney to join Wilkinson and producer Angus Llewellyn for a five-hour meeting.
In an audio recording of that meeting tendered as evidence, Sharaz claimed Higgins wanted Lehrmann to forever have trouble getting a job, as she felt she was going to, and for Reynolds to experience the same. Higgins did not refute this characterisation.
In a later conversation with Maiden, Sharaz said Higgins’ motive was “pure” and she was ultimately determined to ensure something of this nature did not happen to anyone else.
Reynolds said the first she knew of the scandal headed her way was February 2, 2021, when she claims late Victorian Labor senator Kimberley Kitching approached her and revealed Labor intended to use the incident to “rain hell” on her and the government.
She also claimed Kitching said her party were furious with her for forwarding an anonymous letter about the alleged rape to the AFP instead of letting the opposition weaponise it, prompting Reynolds to schedule an urgent meeting with Morrison’s office.
Kitching denied this interaction occurred.
Text messages tendered as evidence indicate Sharaz contacted now-Finance Minister Katy Gallagher about the story as early as February 11, 2021.
The first round of questions from Maiden entered Reynolds’ inbox 48 hours later.
On February 15, Maiden’s story broke: ‘Young staffer Brittany Higgins says she was raped at Parliament House’, an article Sharaz hailed “a f---ing scoop”.
Sharaz texted Llewellyn, the TV producer, claiming to have pointed every journalist in the country to The Project, set to broadcast Higgins’ interview that evening.
Reynolds was overheard uttering the words “lying cow” during the screening in her office, a comment she apologised for after it became public and spurred a defamation action.
She later told her defamation hearing she felt “sick, angry and hurt”.
“I was very angry at what I knew to be lies [about the political cover-up],” she said.
On February 16, 2021, Sharaz texted Llewellyn pointing to a snippet of the interview concerning Reynolds that would “feed this beast” if needed, meaning keep the story going.
Reynolds subsequently faced grillings in parliament and in the media, which her lawyer Bennett told the WA court was the product of questions Higgins and Sharaz fed her opponents and a “dossier” they had distributed with a timeline and list of contacts.
The former minister told the court that by February 23, days of intense scrutiny had taken their toll, culminating in her near-collapse in the Senate, admission to hospital, and cancelling her National Press Club appearance.
A message thread tendered as evidence showed Sharaz mocking reports the then-defence minister delayed her return to work after being hospitalised with a cardiac condition.
Text messages obtained from David Sharaz’s mobile phone and tendered as evidence, between him (blue text) and Brittany Higgins.
The following day, Reynolds was stripped of the defence portfolio and dumped from the frontbench.
High-profile witnesses in the WA court spoke to the impact of the furore on Reynolds’ health and career, from Morrison and former foreign minister Marise Payne to Reynolds’ family.
The impact on her wellbeing has become a key issue in the defamation row.
Why Higgins is defending her posts
Higgins has vehemently defended her posts accusing the senator of mishandling her alleged rape, aiding her alleged rapist during his criminal trial and using the media to harass her.
Higgins’ barrister, Rachael Young, SC, claimed the posts were protected by qualified privilege and were justified as fair comment and honest opinion.
Higgins claims that harassment began in December 2022, when Reynolds leaked confidential emails concerning Higgins’ top-secret personal injury claim (against the federal government, Reynolds and Cash) to journalist Janet Albrechtsen.
Evidence tendered shows Reynolds fired off three emails in quick succession from her personal address on December 12 after taking issue with the Commonwealth’s plan to conduct her defence and leave her “muzzled”.
The contents were later published in an article by The Australian.
Young put it to Reynolds that she sent the emails from her personal address to avoid them becoming public, which she denied.
Higgins’ lawyers were also quick to point to Reynolds’ conduct during Lehrmann’s 2022 criminal trial, including messages the senator exchanged with Lehrmann’s barrister, Steve Whybrow, SC.
Reynolds was quizzed at length about her decision to volunteer the details of staff members who might assist Whybrow, a decision she insisted was made in consultation with her lawyer.
She conceded texts she had sent Whybrow that accused Higgins of a “predilection for expensive clothes” and of trying to imitate Princess of Wales Kate Middleton were “catty”.
Brittany Higgins outside the ACT Supreme Court the day the trial was aborted.Credit: Rhett Wyman
The settlement
The government paid Higgins $2.4 million compensation for lost earnings, medical expenses, legal fees and the humiliation she experienced.
While Reynolds says she does not take issue with Higgins’ pursuit of compensation, Bennett has sought the court’s approval to forward the documents underpinning the settlement to the National Anti-Corruption Commission, including two psychological assessments he claimed were “materially different”.
Reynolds claims the saga is never-ending, with Higgins’ posts perpetuating the political storm that led to her demise.
But the trial over those posts has spawned fresh evidence that Reynolds intends to use as a key weapon in her fight to have Higgins’ compensation claim considered by the corruption watchdog.
In the dying hours of the latest trial to stem from the saga, a date has not been set for a decision and the outcome is far from clear. What is clear is that even more than five years on from that night in Parliament House and with cultural reforms in place, defining the “right” way someone should behave when it all falls apart, without the benefit of hindsight, remains as thorny and complex as ever.
If you or someone you know is impacted by sexual assault, family or domestic violence, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or visit www.1800RESPECT.org.au.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.